ML20126E230

Submits Response to Re Allegation of Apparent Violation of 10CFR70.51 W/Respect to SNM Possessed Under Licenses

ML20126E230
Person / Time
Site:	Big Rock Point, 07000660  File:Consumers Energy icon.png
Issue date:	07/03/1968
From:	Haueter R CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.)
To:	Wischow R US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
References
NUDOCS 8101150407
Download: ML20126E230 (4)

Text

m .. .

.4* g' m

)

~ ~

.- 50-/55_

('

t 2 -. ,., 7o-6 6 o '

C0liSlimBIS N[h . cg) !I

- T Il0W8r  :

, , of Campm1y; ~

id yh v o

. "itegulatory Suppl File Cy.'

'*- General Omc es' 212 West Mic hegurw Avenue. Jackson.' Mech ge'n 4 92oi . Arca Code fA7 7eri OLSO i o -

w .:;, ,

w.. a .

y$ [ i July 3, 1968 .l v av v. 3, c

l> 9

.- .s 4

II EO 14  ?

Mr. R. P. Wischov, Director 01 h,195gA -

(

Division of I!uclear Materials safeguards - sff%rg, l United States Atomic Dier6y Com:nission #47 cr## S '

Washit$ ten, DC 20545 6  %#

CP (b p" ,

Dear Mr. Winchow:

l Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR Part 2, Section 2.201, this letter is sent in reply to your letter dated June 10, 1968 alleg-ig apparent violation of 10 CFR Part 70, Section 70 51 (b) (1) at our Big Rock Point Plant with respect to special nuclear material possessed  ;

under license Hos. SIM-614 and DPR-6.

For background information, ve would like to outline our ,

initial interpretation of events prior to the arrival of your letter.

Before the revised Part 70 Title 10 CFR became effective, we had reviewed the proposed changes, includinc Section 70 51. At that time, it was noted that nuclear reactors were specifically excluded from Section 70 51 (c), thereby leavir; 70 51 (b) as the pertinent regula-tion. This regulation states that we must have sufficient written ,

procedures to allow us to account for special nuclear materials. It was, therefore, necessary to evaluate the subjective tem " sufficient" ,

without any indication that the ground rules had changed. There verc i some written procedures in the Big Rock Point Plant Operating Procc- ,

dures Manual which when coupled with the instractions for fillinc out l AE; Fomo 388 and 576 Ind in the past enabled us to cecount for our. SIE i to the Comissicn's satisfaction. Therefore, we had assuned that this  !

ccnstituted primary evidence of sufficiency. Indeed, at the time, it appeared to us that the new Section 70 51 (b) vas in fact a clarifica- ,

tion of certain dnplications which had been in the previous version of ,

Part 70 vith which nuclear reactors were already complying. We thoucht j this assumption was further supported by the fact that nuclear reactors were also excluded at the licensing stage in Section 70.22 (b), as well as by the fact that the Comission had not made specific provision for compliance by nuclear reactors as they had required for others in Section 70 51 (c). ,

c k

y gjgggnyp w POOR QUAUTY PAGES m :c r* J _ i ,,, ;_ ,., , A'" .% * , 7 *s .-.:.,;..L;,_m,,,...,, , . _ ,

• . af \ -

a .

) 2 Mr. H. P. Wincht u 1 July 3, 1908 l Having thuc interpreted the cinngen to 10 CI'It Part 70, we "

l vere indeed curpriced when during the lact accountability"iripection the incpector infomed us tint the provicionc of Section 70 51 (b) (1) ,

required that vu have and raaintain, encentially, the came written '

procedures an specified in Section 70 51 (c) to the extent that they were applicable to nuclear reacterc. The only difference being that )

we hid not been required to cubmit them to the Co=iscion. This vac particularly di ?ficult to ascimilate cince Section 70 51 (b) (1) l mentionc only "uuiTicient" procedures to acccunt for SIM, while Sec-t io.1 70 51 ( c) neems to be ecncerned primrily with the more canpler. l problem o; nuel nr mteral ce.fegaaris. In :. cat, the AEC publicatitn which tne incpe :ter mer to illuctrate hic aaggestion; for ir:provem*_nt ofl cur procedur es vac entitled, "Proposea Gttide 'for Preparation of Fundanental bL ;rlal C..Ltrolc c.ni Dudcar Mneria3c Safeguards Pro-cedurec." Thic docu.ent is referenced in three places in 10 CFR Part 70, tuo of which cp.:cifically exclude nuclear reactors and the third refers only to physica L inventeries.

Ecvev2r, irrespective cf car pact apparent misinterpretation of Part 70, we lo realice that the Comiccion is cinrged with certain respcncibilitie s which it can discharge +,o its catisfaction either by interpretation af precent regulaticna or by making new ones, Therefore, as required by 10 CFh Part 2, Section 2.201, we submit the following:

1. Corrective stens which have tecn taken and results

-achicved.

bhun tne inspector left the plant we Vere aware that we Sonchol were not in compliance With the neV regulation. UC vere confused as to what the Co=iccicr had in mind. We had been told by the inspectcr that tne Comission was going to publich a guide ecpecially for nuclear reactors, and that we would have until his next inspection to write the procedures.

We had, therefore, by the time your letter arrived made only a general review to determine the scope of what vould be required. 'n'e are currently reviewing the requiremento.

2. Corrective steps which vill be taken.

i.fter receiving your letter, un c alled you and even-tually were provided with a ecpy of "Frcposed Guide for Prepara-tion of Fundamental Material Controls and Iuclear Materialc Safeguardn Procedures," which had been annotated with appropriate co:nnents by the accountability inspector. We vill ace thic along with our present insight into 10 CFR Part 70 to prepare an account-ability m'.nual which will conform to the requirements of Section 70.51 (b) (1) as outlined by the Commission.

, .. s

~~* -

, . O t')

v Mr. H. P. W1ccnov 3 July j, 1908 3 Date when full conmliance vill be achieved.' '

'.le intend to Inve the . completed accountability ennual available for inspection early in the fourth quarter of 1968.

In concludint;, we feel tint we must comment on thic incident.

It appears ao if the Division of Itaclear lhterials Safeguardc is incti-tuting a policy of pron:alcating reguls.tions by iccuing letterc of ncn-ccroliance. 'Je find thic practice particularly distacteful. Thic l particular incident especially,bececace we have been using special nuclear i material and accounting for it apparently to everyone's catisfaction l'or more than six years. Thic whole incident could have been av:> iced by a very cimple corranication fros you Division.

Yourc very truly, 1

'~

D f'i. . ~

GJJ/lv R. L. ihueter Acciatant Electric Production CC: HKJall Superintendent - Huelcar RALa:aley JL3acen EBI.>eWitt l

l 1

l

g s '] e  ; ~4 e , .'9**i

• ~'

7- --- - 1 y - - - . -. , . . - w-e, ; , -- - __ _

~'

• WEWN r

'**E N -Q TC"'L'*N NL - - - --, &-- - - 7 -

n . in_

room un or ==. m is asesn e maa

,A A W& .

M &afrCiiis ~~

ggjg,j g N

• ~'QA- Lita MEMO. ,

(n. L. anneter)  :

Toi otiGa CC4 OTHEta t

Is Fe M ACTION NECEs1ARY g CONCUttSNCE g Daft ANSWEREDi __,

NO ACTION NECESSARY O

• ****"' O '*

CLAi&dfa POST OFftCE F6Li Copes I

$ RfC. Noi DESCillPiiON: @ tat be OndanHed) ag7 tango TO Daft BBCilVID BY DATE IAr. replying to our 6-10 48 s11eptia -

et ;;;::: 2 vioistian at the M a nook a ,_ m Paint Plant w/ respect to sem ;rrnf == F4R M under lieemme ass. 35414 and Drt-6..o w/6 ._ %.

t. m o.ctosuns.

me, e._3 , e m Dr.m-McBride m ww n t-a 9 /M ,

~

JU SUI hwlVV -

'"^*** Matributiset 1-forest file ey. (orig.) 'f @' " " " 'i " 'G -

, s 7 eupp 1 l. f11e ._ , " " ~ ~ '-~--"

2-eeay18mmes n 1-cGC d.4 63

u. s. Atowc EmmoY common Mall CONTROL FORMsm = ^=

• u.s. oovsanusut remnno orricsi seenstooes 9

• = ee e , +,,

g a og a

.m%- 9%we - , u .gse.we+ m.e,w . - -Wa q sp w e - , .s

,,,,,,,,n 3

, , _ , , * " , - ~ , * * - * - , ,_

, _ , _ __