ML20090J791: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot change)
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 17: Line 17:
=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:d'N
{{#Wiki_filter:d'N
*e . . .
*e COMMITTEE TO BRIDGE THE GAP 1637 BUTLER AVENUE #203 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90025 00CKETED (213) 478 0829 USNRC May 10, fS$4 MY 22 All :39 John H. F rye, III, Chairman Dr. Errrneth A. Luebke Glenn O. Bright Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
COMMITTEE TO BRIDGE THE GAP
20555 in the Matter of THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CAllFORNIA (UCt.A Research Reactor)
:                                  1637 BUTLER AVENUE #203
***                              LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90025 00CKETED (213) 478 0829                       USNRC May 10, fS$4 MY 22 All :39 John H. F rye, III, Chairman Dr. Errrneth A. Luebke Glenn O. Bright Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 in the Matter of THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CAllFORNIA (UCt.A Research Reactor)
Docket No. 50-142 Ok (Proposed Renewal of Facility License)
Docket No. 50-142 Ok (Proposed Renewal of Facility License)


==Dear Administrative Judges:==
==Dear Administrative Judges:==
Enclosed please find the attachments to "CBG Response to Applicant's Request for Reversal of the Board's April 13 Finding of Haterial False Statements" (May 9,1984).
Enclosed please find the attachments to "CBG Response to Applicant's Request for Reversal of the Board's April 13 Finding of Haterial False Statements" (May 9,1984).
Sincerely yours,
Sincerely yours,
                                                            .4 ji       ,
.4 ji f
f        W           '
W GQ Steven Aftergood
GQ Steven Aftergood     /   y i
/
cc w/ enclosures: service list 8405230240 840510 PDR ADOCK 05000142 0                   PDR
y i
cc w/ enclosures: service list 8405230240 840510 PDR ADOCK 05000142 0
PDR


    *}
*}
i t
t i
(
(
Attachments to "CBG RESPONSE TO APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR REVERSAL OF THE BOARD'S APRIL 13 FINDING OF MATERIAL FALSE STATEMENTS" (May 9,1984)
Attachments to "CBG RESPONSE TO APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR REVERSAL OF THE BOARD'S APRIL 13 FINDING OF MATERIAL FALSE STATEMENTS" (May 9,1984)
(
(
Attachment A           Letter of November 30, 1973 from AEC's Donald J.
Attachment A Letter of November 30, 1973 from AEC's Donald J.
Skovholt.to UCLA's NEL (1 page)
Skovholt.to UCLA's NEL (1 page)
Attachment B           Regulatory Guide 1.17       (2 pages) o Attachment C           Letter of July 15, 1974 f rom Karl R. Goller                 !
Attachment B Regulatory Guide 1.17 (2 pages) o Attachment C Letter of July 15, 1974 f rom Karl R. Goller to UCLA's= NEL with 2 enclosures: (t) deficiencies in UCLA proposed securlty plan; (2)
to UCLA's= NEL with 2 enclosures: (t) deficiencies in UCLA proposed securlty plan; (2) Interim Guidance for Organization and Content of Security             (
Interim Guidance for Organization and Content of Security
Plans   (5 pages) ,
(
Attachment D           Letter of November 18, 1974 f rom George Lear to HEL (I page)     '
Plans (5 pages)
Attachment E           Letter oi'' January 8,1975 f rom' George Lear to NEL (1 page) cAttachment F           Letter of" September 30, 1976 from UCLA's Ivan Catton- to NP.C, l'ndicating compliance with 10 CFR           l
Attachment D Letter of November 18, 1974 f rom George Lear to HEL (I page)
                              /         73.40 (1 page)
Attachment E Letter oi'' January 8,1975 f rom' George Lear to NEL (1 page) cAttachment F Letter of" September 30, 1976 from UCLA's Ivan Catton-to NP.C, l'ndicating compliance with 10 CFR l
Attachment G'         Letter of Julyfil,1977 f rom George Lear to UCLA   .(2pagns):
/
                ' Attachment H         Memorandum of Ju.nc 28, 1979 from James R. Miller             (
73.40 (1 page)
to Robert Burnett       (2 pages)
Attachment G' Letter of Julyfil,1977 f rom George Lear to UCLA
Attachment i           Letter of ragust' 9,1979 from Frank Pagano (1 page)           (
.(2pagns):
                ' Attachment J           Excerpts from Svnple Physical Security Plan, Revision I, June 14, 1979 (3 pages)                           >
' Attachment H Memorandum of Ju.nc 28, 1979 from James R. Miller
Attachment ~K         Excerpts f rom SECY-79-187C,-December 19, 1979 e                (2 pages)
(
Attachment'll         Uni ted Press, international wi re service story, January 4,1984 (1 page)
to Robert Burnett (2 pages)
Attachment i Letter of ragust' 9,1979 from Frank Pagano (1 page)
(
' Attachment J Excerpts from Svnple Physical Security Plan, Revision I, June 14, 1979 (3 pages)
Attachment ~K Excerpts f rom SECY-79-187C,-December 19, 1979 (2 pages) e Attachment'll Uni ted Press, international wi re service story, January 4,1984 (1 page)
(
(
1 e
1 e
e i
e i


Attechmont'A             -
Attechmont'A
          ,{                             :. ;
,{
                                                                                                                    ===,
d,'y,
d,'y ,V UNITED STATES                                               3.:~E 2
= = =,
            .\ [ N           't               ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION                                           h:1
,V UNITED STATES 3.:~E 2
                *Y*             ' '
.\\ [ N
W ASHINGTON, D.C. 20545                                       1.. . . .
't ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION h:1
5,,   ly >                                                                                       EEE":
*Y*
                      %ne                                                                                             . . . . . . . . . .
W ASHINGTON, D.C. 20545 1.....
November 30, 1973 kst No.-50-142                                                                                   . -.l;;;lF#
5,,
                                                                                                                        .... . .b._.;
ly >
The Regents of the University                                                             .:::sGl:.
EEE":
of California Nuclear Energy Laboratory                                                                 e. -
%ne
ATTN: Mr. Thomas E. Hicks                                                                       -
. - lF#
Director 1.os Angeles, California 90024
November 30, 1973 kst No.-50-142 l;;;
                ,      Gentlemen:                                                                                   V..
.......b._.;
                                                                                                                    =i2$
The Regents of the University
On hbvember 6,1973, the Commission adopted amendments to its regulations                   E05 in 10 CFR Parts 50, 70, and 73 which are to strengthen the physical                       .Z protection of reactor facilities and of special nuclear s terials. The                     f...........
.:::sGl:.
new mies require in part that licensees of pmduction and utilization                       !E F facilities submit a physical security plan to the Comission by                             ...,,;....
of California Nuclear Energy Laboratory
January 7, 1974. A copy of the amendments is enclosed for your use.                           . ~:;.~ ,
: e. -
                                                                                                                    .:= ::
ATTN:
Tne submitted plan should be as described in the new 10 CFR Part 50.34(c) and comply with the requirements stated in the new Part 73. Regulatory           \           ~~1..      .
Mr. Thomas E. Hicks Director 1.os Angeles, California 90024 Gentlemen:
Guide 1.17, " Protection of hbclear Pcwer Plants Against Industrial     .        l'              ..u.;
V..
Sabotage", states an acceptable Regulatory position for complying with                           . . . . .
=i2$
this requirement. Reactor facilities other than power reactors should                       .se use the position in the Regulatory Guide to the extent practicable.                         =2=
On hbvember 6,1973, the Commission adopted amendments to its regulations E05 in 10 CFR Parts 50, 70, and 73 which are to strengthen the physical
e If you have previously submitted a security plan, please review it with respect to the requirements in these regulations. If you conclude that                      "~i,;...
.Z protection of reactor facilities and of special nuclear s terials. The f...........
all applicable requirements of Part 73 are met by your plan, indicate               .
new mies require in part that licensees of pmduction and utilization
this conclusion and provide specific reference to the plan. If all                           =
!E F facilities submit a physical security plan to the Comission by January 7, 1974. A copy of the amendments is enclosed for your use.
. ~:;.~,
.:= ::
Tne submitted plan should be as described in the new 10 CFR Part 50.34(c) and comply with the requirements stated in the new Part 73. Regulatory
\\
~~1..
Guide 1.17, " Protection of hbclear Pcwer Plants Against Industrial l
..u.;
Sabotage", states an acceptable Regulatory position for complying with this requirement. Reactor facilities other than power reactors should
.se use the position in the Regulatory Guide to the extent practicable.
=2=
e If you have previously submitted a security plan, please review it with all applicable requirements of Part 73 are met by your plan, indicate
"~i,;...
respect to the requirements in these regulations.
If you conclude that this conclusion and provide specific reference to the plan.
If all
=
requirements are not met an amendment or revised plan should be filed.
requirements are not met an amendment or revised plan should be filed.
Three copies of your plan should be submitted. Your letter of transmittal should request that the plan be withheld from public disclosure pursuant                   -
Three copies of your plan should be submitted. Your letter of transmittal should request that the plan be withheld from public disclosure pursuant to Section 2.790 of 10 CFR Part 2.
I to Section 2.790 of 10 CFR Part 2.                                               e Sincerely,
I e
                                                                                                                        .**:. i. ;.'
Sincerely,
                                                                          ,                                          .==
. :. i. ;.'
                                                                                                                                ;W DonalaJ.Alovholt/h f fkh?
.==
Assistant Director for
DonalaJ.Alovholt/h f fkh?
                                                                                                                          "==
;W
Operating Reactors                               eig.c:=.
"==
Directorate of Licensing                             "9E=
Assistant Director for Operating Reactors eig.c:=.
                                                                                            .                        .E=
Directorate of Licensing "9E=
.E=


==Enclosure:==
==Enclosure:==
{
{
Amendments to 10 CFR Parts 50, 70,                                                             _. .;
Amendments to 10 CFR Parts 50, 70, and 73 published November 6, 1973 4
and 73 published November 6, 1973 4
1u p:
1u 4%- o           p: .
4%- o
                                                                                                                ...~..:         '.
... ~.. ':.


-~ -
-~ -
Attechrnent B
Attechrnent B
    'C   s               n.' r
'C s
      ,  l      /'g,a                             U.S. ATp!IC ENERGY CEMMISClON                                                                                                 June 1973 1         1             -
n.' r l
c,' eras oi
/'g,a June 1973 U.S. ATp!IC ENERGY CEMMISClON
                                        !          R EGULATO RY GURDE Dir.ECTORATE OF REGULATORY GTANDARDS 0
! R EGULATO RY GURDE 1
r i
1 0
REGULATORY GUIDE 1.17                                                                                       f PROTECTION OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS AGAINST INDUSTRIAL SABOTAGE
r c,' eras oi Dir.ECTORATE OF REGULATORY GTANDARDS i
                                        . A, INTRODUCTION                                                                                                                                       i National Standards Committee NIS and is in final review                               '
REGULATORY GUIDE 1.17 f
by Be American National Standards Institute (ANSI)
PROTECTION OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS AGAINST INDUSTRIAL SABOTAGE i
On February 1, 1973, the Atomic Energy                                               Board of Standards Review.
. A, INTRODUCTION National Standards Committee NIS and is in final review by Be American National Standards Institute (ANSI)
Commission had published in the Fedcral Regirte                                                                                                                                   ;
On February 1,
proposed amendments to its regulation in 10 CFR Part                                                                                                                               '
1973, the Atomic Energy Board of Standards Review.
in addition to the procedural measures described in 50, "Umnsing of Production and Utihzation                                                   ANSI N18.17, the design of structures. systems. and Facilities." Proposed [ 50.55c would require each                                           components important to safety (e.E., such features as beensee authorized to operate a nuclear reactor to                                         redundancy, automation, independence. dh e rsity.                                     ,
Commission had published in the Fedcral Regirte proposed amendments to its regulation in 10 CFR Part in addition to the procedural measures described in 50, "Umnsing of Production and Utihzation ANSI N18.17, the design of structures. systems. and Facilities." Proposed [ 50.55c would require each components important to safety (e.E., such features as beensee authorized to operate a nuclear reactor to redundancy, automation, independence. dh e rsity.
pronde appropriate protection against industrial                                           protection against common-mode failures, and the                                       '
pronde appropriate protection against industrial protection against common-mode failures, and the s:botage. Proposed paragraph (c), " Physical Security placement of facilities and equipment) can also provide l
s:botage. Proposed paragraph (c), " Physical Security                                       placement of facilities and equipment) can also provide Plan
Plan
* of { 50.34 would require each application for                                       protection against acts ofindustrial sabotage.Therefore.                               l an operating licens: to include a physical security plan.                                   it is considered prudent to enhance this form of Proposed paragraph (p) of { 50.34 would require                                             protection by protecting the vital equipment against existing licensees who have not submitted a physical                                         surreptitious acts of industrial sabotage that could secunty plan to submit such a plan to the Commission                                       impair the performance of its intended safety functions.                               j for approval within 60 days after the publication of                                       it is important that such protection be considered early these amendments in effective form. Furthermore,                                                                                                                                   {
* of { 50.34 would require each application for protection against acts ofindustrial sabotage.Therefore.
in the design stage and that protective measures be
an operating licens: to include a physical security plan.
              } 50.34 requires that an application for a construction                                     described in the application for a construction permit.
it is considered prudent to enhance this form of Proposed paragraph (p) of { 50.34 would require protection by protecting the vital equipment against existing licensees who have not submitted a physical surreptitious acts of industrial sabotage that could secunty plan to submit such a plan to the Commission impair the performance of its intended safety functions.
permit melude the principal design criteria to be satisfied                                 At a later stage, these measures would be described in                                   :
j for approval within 60 days after the publication of it is important that such protection be considered early
in meeting the requirements for structures, systems,and                                     greater detail in the applicant's security plan identified                             {
{
components essential to safety This regulatory guide                                       in proposed paragraphs (c) and (p) of Q 50.34.
these amendments in effective form. Furthermore, in the design stage and that protective measures be
describes physical security criteria that are Senerally acceptable for the protection of nuclear power plants                                                               C. REGULATORY POSITION against acts of industrial sabotage which could lead to a threat to the health and safety of the public. The                                                 The requirements and recommendations contained                                     .
} 50.34 requires that an application for a construction described in the application for a construction permit.
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards has been                                           in the proposed ANSI Standard N18.17. " Industrial                                     (
permit melude the principal design criteria to be satisfied At a later stage, these measures would be described in in meeting the requirements for structures, systems,and greater detail in the applicant's security plan identified
consuhed conceming this guide and has concurred in the                                       Security for Nudear Pov er Plants,". dated March 23, regulatory position.                                                                         1973, are generally acceptable and, with due consideration for the unique characteristics of the plant B. DISCUSSION                                             and its owner organaation, provide an adequate basis for                                 I a physical security plan for the prc,tection of nuclear Subcommittee ANS 3 of the Ameriern Nudcar                                           power             plants apinst industrial                         sabotage,       as Soacty St:.ndads Comnuttee has developed a standard                                         supplemented by the following:
{
that proddes criteria for industrial security propams to protcer oparational nudear power plants from acts of                                         1. Security Sytrems mdaunal sabotag which could lead to a threat to the                                                 a.       The plant *.ecurity forces should base onsite, health and safety of the pubbe. This sta*,dard, to be                                       arrned, and uniformed ind.viduals w hose primary duties despa ted ANSI NIS.17. " Industrial Security for                                             are the protection of facilities from acts that could Nudcar Pt wer Plams,"' has !;een reviewed by American                                       endanpr the health and safety of the pubhc.
components essential to safety This regulatory guide in proposed paragraphs (c) and (p) of Q 50.34.
: b. All security alarms should annunciate in a
describes physical security criteria that are Senerally acceptable for the protection of nuclear power plants C. REGULATORY POSITION against acts of industrial sabotage which could lead to a threat to the health and safety of the public. The The requirements and recommendations contained Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards has been in the proposed ANSI Standard N18.17. " Industrial
                    '( eries may te ottamed from the Amerian Nuc! car                                   continuoasi) mant ed, ensite central klarm st2 tion and in Sme t) . 44 E. OJgen Otnue. Hinsdale,In.noi 60521.                                           at least one other continuously tranned station not                                       i USAEc (EOULAToRY GUIDES                                         coe.= ce vei r .*=c pA<t         e., to cc..,-s t, ,=p         ,6w g v. e.. e o ee in        ce v s. Aie-ac
(
: a.       -v c -,. - . .. o-                                 . . e                        Ae.~            c...- .+ r .wi,f -,s. a-yv Co%.e nee. w h.-co.s    e,o DE    , rio.46, e.,
consuhed conceming this guide and has concurred in the Security for Nudear Pov er Plants,". dated March 23, regulatory position.
            . .-,. ~ e.m e. .. e i e P ., e., . :e ...o           % , .., .n.s ,e e,. p..,. p ,w.,                                                                              ,,.re            j ve Cc-==eseres .             are. ens to :=2.     . i.esa w.      ae try v,s .te't en
1973, are generally acceptable and, with due consideration for the unique characteristics of the plant B. DISCUSSION and its owner organaation, provide an adequate basis for I
                                                                                                      , ,,o    ,m,.,,.     .
a physical security plan for the prc,tection of nuclear Subcommittee ANS 3 of the Ameriern Nudcar power plants apinst industrial
r ... ~,.~ . C.~a t.,
: sabotage, as Soacty St:.ndads Comnuttee has developed a standard supplemented by the following:
et see Cwesen. VA. A mes r *= s Cow =ncet wa t. ere. 0 2. Tir45.
that proddes criteria for industrial security propams to protcer oparational nudear power plants from acts of 1.
                                                                                                                                                                              ,, e ,,e rer.ie.,    -
Security Sytrems mdaunal sabotag which could lead to a threat to the a.
            **3+      m ei=ohr cre6a.*e or swer u e e<ewwam. o. so grew,,. p e. ace se               A tie wr*     Chet. PvtAt P eas-Mn ! t.*t eeschesam Pey4ettre Gvw1.= e e cet a.rutstees f er rupletene.e eae ete.gu.%cs WWi%I*** b 8601 f.Geaire$ beethodh omd .rm.plere S iPf.rvet f.ty9 tb fts. .et out apt     De portWS .-9
The plant *.ecurity forces should base onsite, health and safety of the pubbe. This sta*,dard, to be arrned, and uniformed ind.viduals w hose primary duties despa ted ANSI NIS.17. " Industrial Security for are the protection of facilities from acts that could Nudcar Pt wer Plams,"' has !;een reviewed by American endanpr the health and safety of the pubhc.
* rom eri t6e Sof >wey pas. tefarf das,ere P. ph.*fte . ell te m ses2tahe. el they gare,vt. a toe ne for e.g. f.p.*eq,, reg ...te to
b.
            '*45 'h t -tre e' coet***tre of a swarstel O' I ce"m. %.y f*.e CfunPwhaqq.                 1. P 2.aae betterg                           f. P 'tsbru
All security alarms should annunciate in a
                ,                                                                                      2 D r.=-ce . c Teet F c$res                   7 Tes, w etee.
'( eries may te ottamed from the Amerian Nuc! car continuoasi) mant ed, ensite central klarm st2 tion and in Sme t). 44 E. OJgen Otnue. Hinsdale,In.noi 60521.
P a 'arme e,. cme . 81 t=
at least one other continuously tranned station not i
3 r . .. , e u , *, e F .( i.     .e,       B e.: eer.' .-. snih w ==e s. e.e ='iv.     a.icror .e o. to .w s wwwe     a r . . .--.- , . s ., qi                     9 A m     .,e s e.
USAEc (EOULAToRY GUIDES coe.= ce vei.*=c pA<t e., to cc..,-s t,,=p
e tire ames auf to .w8 auct       af o,an e te cy e gw e.sce                             & W . ie ..., .,ug P...sq P eg. w, ene,     10 C.r   es
,6w g v. e..
            ~
r e
_~~           . _ . - - - - ~
c...-.+ r.wi,f a-yv Co%. nee. w h.-co.s DE, rio.46, ce v s. Aie-ac o ee in a.
-v c -,. -... o-e Ae.~
..-,. ~ e.m e...
e i e P
., e.,. :...o
.. e
,e e,. p,w,
,,,o
,m,.,,.
r... ~,.~. C ~,
e,o
,,.re e.,
-,s.
e j
%,..,.n.s p..,..
. a t.
,, e,,e rer.ie.,
ve Cc-==eseres.
are. ens to :=2.
. i.esa w.
ae try v,s.te't en et see Cwesen. VA. A mes r *= s Cow =ncet wa t. ere. 0 2. Tir45.
**3+
m ei=ohr cre6a.*e or swer u e e<ewwam. o. so grew,,. p e. ace se A tie wr* Chet. PvtA P eas-Mn ! t.*t t
eeschesam Pey4ettre Gvw1.= e e cet a.rutstees f er rupletene.e eae ete.gu.%cs WWi%I*** b 8601 f.Geaire$ beethodh omd.rm.plere S iPf.rvet f.ty9 tb ts..et out apt De portWS.-9
* rom eri t6e Sof >wey pas. tefarf das,ere f
P. ph.*fte. ell te m ses2tahe. el they gare,vt. a toe ne for e.g. f.p.*eq,, reg
...te to
'*45 'h t -tre e' coet***tre of a swarstel O' I ce"m. %.y f*.e CfunPwhaqq.
: 1. P 2.aae betterg f.
P 'tsbru 2 D r.=-ce. c Teet F c$res 7 Tes, w etee.
3 r..., e u, *, e F.( i.
.e, B e.: eer.'.-. snih P a 'arme e,. cme. 81 t=
w==e s. e.e ='iv.
a.icror.e o. to.w s wwwe a r...--.-,. s., qi 9 A m
.,e s e.
e tire ames auf to.w8 auct af o,an e te cy e gw e.sce
& W. ie...,.,ug P...sq P eg. w, ene, 10 C.r es
~
_~~
. _. - - - - ~


e   .
e t
t       .
necessarily onsite. A11 alarminhould be self checking and communication equipment, should be functionally t
necessarily onsite. A11 alarminhould be self checking and                                                                         communication equipment, should be functionally tamper indicating. Le annunctation of an alarm at the                                                                             tested for operability at the commencement and
, l,8 tamper indicating. Le annunctation of an alarm at the tested for operability at the commencement and ons!te central shrm station should indi:ste the type of completion of esch interval during utJch such alarm (e.g., intrualon alarm, emerp: rey exit alstm) and equ!pm:nt is used for se'eurity, but no less frequently location, ne annunciation at the other alarm station than once e:ch anen days.
, l ,8 ons!te central shrm station should indi:ste the type of                                                                           completion of esch interval during utJch such alarm (e.g., intrualon alarm, emerp: rey exit alstm) and                                                                           equ!pm:nt is used for se'eurity, but no less frequently location, ne annunciation at the other alarm station                                                                               than once e:ch anen days.
should, as a rrinimum, provide indications that an b.
should, as a rrinimum, provide indications that an                                                                                       b. Communication equipment used for security intrusion or Chpl entry has occuned. De affected                                                                                 should be tested with a minimum frequency of once at armunciator should be reset only after satisfactory                                                                               the beginning of each security force work shift.
Communication equipment used for security intrusion or Chpl entry has occuned. De affected should be tested with a minimum frequency of once at armunciator should be reset only after satisfactory the beginning of each security force work shift.
communications have taken place between alarm stations. All intrusion alarms, emergency exit alarms,                                                                             3. Protection of Vital Equiptrx nt alarm systems, and line supervisory systems should,as a                                                                                 Approprinte design fr.atures and equipment rninimum, meet the level of performance and reliability                                                                           arrarEements should be provided and be consistent with indicated by GSA In                   Federal Spcification                                                                           er sa ety requirunents to reduce 6e cpportunity for W.A 00450 A (GSA FSS)*,terim                                                                                                     successful industrial ssbotage of stal equipment.To the extent feasible, these features should include measures
communications have taken place between alarm stations. All intrusion alarms, emergency exit alarms, 3.
: 2. Equipment Teeting                                                                                                           to protect gainst undetected intentionalacts that could
Protection of Vital Equiptrx nt alarm systems, and line supervisory systems should,as a Approprinte design fr.atures and equipment rninimum, meet the level of performance and reliability arrarEements should be provided and be consistent with indicated by GSA In Federal Spcification er sa ety requirunents to reduce 6e cpportunity for W.A 00450 A (GSA FSS)*,terim successful industrial ssbotage of stal equipment.To the extent feasible, these features should include measures 2.
: a. Security related equipment, except for                                                                                 impair equiptrient perforracnce, such as automatic
Equipment Teeting to protect gainst undetected intentionalacts that could a.
                      'Ceples reay be obtained from budness service centers of the General Services Adminisustion Reponal Offices located in th' f E*
Security related equipment, except for impair equiptrient perforracnce, such as automatic
* i 'E *i**                                                                                                                   Detailed s-curity measures for the . physical Protection of the facility against indtistrialsabotage will rnston. Mn a.         Denver.colo.               Kansa s City, Mo.
'Ceples reay be obtained from budness service centers of the General Services Adminisustion Reponal Offices located in th' f E*
Nr York. N.Y.         San Francisen, Ca.         tes Argeles.Ca.                                                                 be withheld from pJblic discloture as provided in wnMr,rt on. D.C.     Atlanta Ga.
* i 'E *i**
Seattle. Wash.                                                                     I 2.790 of the Commission's regulations in 10CFR Ft. Worth. Te nas     Chicago, Itt.                                                                                               Part 2.
Detailed s-curity measures for the. physical Protection of the facility against indtistrialsabotage will rnston. Mn a.
Denver.colo.
Kansa s City, Mo.
Nr York. N.Y.
San Francisen, Ca.
tes Argeles.Ca.
be withheld from pJblic discloture as provided in wnMr,rt on. D.C.
Atlanta Ga.
Seattle. Wash.
I 2.790 of the Commission's regulations in 10CFR Ft. Worth. Te nas Chicago, Itt.
Part 2.
: 1. I i.'
: 1. I i.'
: /
Attachment C N
'STRIBUTION t
acket File AEC PDR(w/o encl.1)
,y ::7 Branch Reading 1)i===:5 JRBuchanan, ORNL (w/o eacl. ;.:::
RO (3)
JUL.1 5 1974 KRColler, L:0R RAPeepie r-LtGR-1
'... " 'r:
IfBranchChief,OR
- - - ~ ~
Docket No. 50-142 Project Manager, OR
,.The Regents of the University Y#
Licensing Assistant, OR d
of California TPFlood, L:0R-1 Nuclear Energy Laboratory TJCarter, L:0R ATTN:
Mr. Thomas E. Ricks SVarga, L:RP Director OGC Los Angeles, California RBouston, L:0SB y-~.
:?
~::..':
===
....!.'.5.5:
Gentlemen:
"EEE
.EsE" We have reviewed your proposed security plan dated January 14, 1974.
At this -time, we are unable to complete our evaluation with the infor-
==!!:
mation provided. Enclosure 1 identifies deficiencies in your plan with


: /                    --                                                                                                                                          .
===
      -                                                                                                                    Attachment C t                                      N                                                                                'STRIBUTION                                      ,
respect to the interim guide, enclosure 2, against which your plan was
    ,                                                                                                                      acket File                            :.:::
=E s evaluated.
AEC PDR(w/o encl.1)        ,y ::7 Branch Reading          1)i===:5 JRBuchanan, ORNL (w/o eacl. ;.:::
(Enclosure 2 titled " Interim Guidance.- Organization and
RO (3)                            ":::
.:=55:
KRColler, L:0R              . _ . . . . . .
Content of Security Plans for Power Easaarch and Training Rasctors"
JUL.1 5 1974                                      RAPeepie r-LtGR-1          ' ... " 'r:
~==
Docket No. 50-142                                                                                                IfBranchChief,OR              - - - ~ ~
is furnished for your asidance.)L "
                                                                                                                    !      Project Manager, OR
l=5.~Ji
                ,.The Regents of the University                                                                Y#          Licensing Assistant, OR    ___
=. =.
of California                                                                                d TPFlood, L:0R-1                    . . . _ . .
E We request that you smend your plan to incorporate the information indi-cated in the interin guide. Also, identify any feature of your plan c.E that cannot be implemented within 30 days and describe the interim
Nuclear Energy Laboratory                                                                              TJCarter, L:0R ATTN: Mr. Thomas E. Ricks                                                                              SVarga, L:RP Director                                                                                  OGC Los Angeles, California                                                                                RBouston, L:0SB              . ..
:E meaqures that would be taken to provide an equivalent level of protection.
y-~.            :?
. i= :
                                                                                                                                                        ~::. ===
We request that your revised plan be submitted within 30 days from the date of this letter. Your security plan submittal is exempt from public 18 9 diaelosure pursuant to 10 CFR Part 2, Section 2.790(d) and should be so
                                                                                                                                                        . .. .!.'.5.5:
"= E marked when transmitted.
Gentlemen:                                                                                                                          "EEE
'lig.
                                                                                                                                                      .EsE" We have reviewed your proposed security plan dated January 14, 1974.                                                                                  _
Sincerely, i
At this -time, we are unable to complete our evaluation with the infor-                                                                      ==!!:
mation provided. Enclosure 1 identifies deficiencies in your plan with                                                              ===
respect to the interim guide, enclosure 2, against which your plan was                                                               =E s evaluated. (Enclosure 2 titled " Interim Guidance.- Organization and                                                                     .:=55:
Power Easaarch and Training Rasctors"                                           ~==
Content of Security Plans for is furnished for your asidance.)L "                                                                                                     l=5.~Ji   :
                                                                                                                                                                    =.=.-
We request that you smend your plan to incorporate the information indi-                                                                     E cated in the interin guide. Also, identify any feature of your plan                                                                           c.E that cannot be implemented within 30 days and describe the interim                                                                               :E meaqures that would be taken to provide an equivalent level of protection.                                                                   . i= :
We request that your revised plan be submitted within 30 days from the                                                               _
date of this letter. Your security plan submittal is exempt from public                                                               18 9 diaelosure pursuant to 10 CFR Part 2, Section 2.790(d) and should be so                                                       .      "= E marked when transmitted.                                                                                                                 'lig.
Sincerely,                                                                               i
_ =.:
_ =.:
Original Signed by,                                                         "~9 Karl Gouer Karl R. Coller, Assistant Director                                                       . . .
Original Signed by,
for Operating Raactors                                                             . - . -
"~9 Karl Gouer Karl R. Coller, Assistant Director for Operating Raactors Directorats of Licensing
Directorats of Licensing                                                           . .:.=;.
..:.=;.
EEis
EEis


==Enclosures:==
==Enclosures:==
                                                                                                                                  ... .E
....E 1.
: 1. Request for Additional Information                                                                                                 !!=!jii;.
Request for Additional Information
: 2. Interim Guidance                                                                                                                         =: -
!!=!jii;.
T::
2.
N.h 5=
Interim Guidance
o,nc . ,        L:0R-1       L:0 RPM g _ n L:0RBC. , ,
=: -
Ms L:0R g gf, i m er hh
T N.h 5=
                                                                                                                                                              .==
L:0R-1 L:0 RPM g _ n L:0RBC.,,
                                                                                                                                                                  . J.i:
L:0R g gf, hh
        .u.....,           TPFlood:dc    DJaff(                    Gledr                                    KRGoller
. J.i:
              .m >          N[74           7/ l$ /7               7/ /f' /74                               6//.2/74 e C. .. . . Lv. 9 5 )) ARCM 0240 W u; s. eovsma. ant paiurene carie se t e7..eas-tes
o,nc.,
                                                ..J .:'
Ms i m er
.==
TPFlood:dc DJaff(
Gledr KRGoller
.u.....,
N[74 7/ l$ /7 7/ /f' /74 6//.2/74
.m >
e C..... Lv. 9 5 )) ARCM 0240 W u; s. eovsma. ant paiurene carie se t e7..eas-tes
..J.:'


m
m s.
            ,,                                      , s.                             . .                          M' f
M' f
    't WITHHELD FRO:4 PUBLIC . DISCLOSURE 4
't WITHHELD FRO:4 PUBLIC. DISCLOSURE
(
4 Docket lio. 50-142 5
Enclosure i:o.1 The foflowing' paragraph nu.ders refer to th.ose sections of the
(
(
Docket lio. 50-142 5
interim guidance document (Enclosure 2) which are not addressed in sufficient detail to permit a thorough evaluation of your security plan.
        ,                                                                  Enclosure i:o.1 The foflowing' paragraph nu.ders refer to th.ose sections of the
w Paraora oh 'i!o.
          '                                                                                                                                                      (
Subject I.A.
interim guidance document (Enclosure 2) which are not addressed
Essential Equipment I.B.
            .            in sufficient detail to permit a thorough evaluation of your w      security plan.
Security Area I. C. '
Paraora oh 'i!o.                                               Subject                                                         .
Security Systems II.A.
I.A.                                                           Essential Equipment I.B.                                                           Security Area I . C. '                                                       Security Systems                                                   .
Organization
II.A.                                                           Organization II.B.                                                           Access Control                                                         (
. II.B.
              -    . II.C.                                                           Surveillance II.D.                                             ..          Procedures                                               ..
Access Control
II.E.                                                           Security Program !!eview You are reminded that since your license authorizes possession of Stiti                                                               -
(
in excess of 5. kilograms U-235, that compliance with 10CFR73.50 and 73.60 would be required if your inventory of non-exempt S!N equals or exceeds the formula quahtity specified in,14CFR73.1.
II.C.
                                                  .        WITHHELD FRG:4 PUBLIC DISCLOSURE L'
Surveillance II.D.
Procedures II.E.
Security Program !!eview You are reminded that since your license authorizes possession of Stiti in excess of 5. kilograms U-235, that compliance with 10CFR73.50 and 73.60 would be required if your inventory of non-exempt S!N equals or exceeds the formula quahtity specified in,14CFR73.1.
WITHHELD FRG:4 PUBLIC DISCLOSURE L'
e
e
                                                                                                            .h
.h
                                .-..,n.
.-..,n.
                                                        ..    ...,..,....r.       ...-.~..:..   . . . . . > - . , . ~ . - , - , . ~ . - .
...,..,....r.
                                                                                                                                          .,._.a...
...-.~..:..
                                                                      . o             .-      -
..... > -.,. ~. -
, -,. ~. -.
.,._.a...
o


q'                                                         {,
q'
Enclosura 2 Interim Guidance - Orgaaization and Cpntent of Security Plans for                       ..                      ,
{,
Lou Po.ler Research and Training Reactors Applicability - This interim guidance is for use in developing and evaluatinc security plans for low power research and training reactors. For purposes of this guide, these reactors are defined as'TRIGA reactors with authorized power
Enclosura 2 Interim Guidance - Orgaaization and Cpntent of Security Plans for Lou Po.ler Research and Training Reactors Applicability - This interim guidance is for use in developing and evaluatinc security plans for low power research and training reactors.
                  ~ levels less than or equal to 250 KW and all other researen and training reactors with power levels less than or equal to 100 K.l, including AG'I's, zero power, and critical facilities.                                     o
For purposes of this guide, these reactors are defined as'TRIGA reactors with authorized power
                                                                                                                                                    ~
~ levels less than or equal to 250 KW and all other researen and training reactors with power levels less than or equal to 100 K.l, including AG'I's, zero power, and critical facilities.
Purpose - The purpose of the security plan developed according to this guidance is to protect the reactor against acts of sabotage.                                                   It is intended for use by the licensee to demonstrate compliance with 10CFR50.34(c) and 10CFR73.40.                             Conformance with this guide will not assure compliance with 10CFR73.50 and 10CFR73.60, if these parts are applicable to tne license'e.'                                                 ~
o
~
Purpose - The purpose of the security plan developed according to this guidance is to protect the reactor against acts of sabotage.
It is intended for use by the licensee to demonstrate compliance with 10CFR50.34(c) and 10CFR73.40.
Conformance with this guide will not assure compliance with 10CFR73.50 and 10CFR73.60, if these parts are applicable to tne license'e.'
[l
[l
: 1. Design Features A.           Essential Equipment - Essential equipment should be designated in the security plan.             This should include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following:                       the reactor, the reactor coolant system, reactor controls, and any associated equipment the m
~
1.
Design Features A.
Essential Equipment - Essential equipment should be designated in the security plan.
This should include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following:
the reactor, the reactor coolant system, reactor controls, and any associated equipment the m
9
9
,                      .,..+,....o....           -
.,..+,....o....
a.w     .
a.w
                                                                  . . - . . .  ..    ..o . . . . . , . . . s a     .a.,   -        .        .
..o
.....,... s a
.a.,


(                   .                  4 failure of which could endanger ~ the health and safety of the .public.                                                                                      .
(
B. Security Area - security areas should be identified and described, including plan drawings or s' ketches showing these in context of the site location and showing access points.
4 failure of which could endanger ~ the health and safety of the.public.
At least the fuel storage area, the reactor control room, and the reactor room or building sho,uld be described as security areas.                                 ,
B.
C. Security Systems
Security Area - security areas should be identified and described, including plan drawings or s' ketches showing these in context of the site location and showing access points.
: 1. Locks and Keys - a d'scription e            of the lock and k.ey system should be provided; describe how keys 'are controlled; ioent1Ty tne specific individuci (*uy positivo LiLie) responsible for the security of the keys.
At least the fuel storage area, the reactor control room, and the reactor room or building sho,uld be described as security areas.
: 2.     Communications - the.. communication system to be used in the event of a security violation should be described.                     -
C.
II. Administrative Controls A. Organization
Security Systems Locks and Keys - a d'scription of the lock and k.ey system 1.
: 1.     Security organization - the person responsible for the facility security program should be identified (by position title); the person (s) or group (s) having security functions and responsibilities on a day to day basis should be identified.
e should be provided; describe how keys 'are controlled; ioent1Ty tne specific individuci (*uy positivo LiLie) responsible for the security of the keys.
                                                  .y...-_.__..    .._4,.._,.....         , . . . .   . . . . . . -    , _ ,
2.
Communications - the.. communication system to be used in the event of a security violation should be described.
II.
Administrative Controls A.
Organization 1.
Security organization - the person responsible for the facility security program should be identified (by position title); the person (s) or group (s) having security functions and responsibilities on a day to day basis should be identified.
.._4,.._,.....
.y...-_.__..


  . ,7 i                     -                                                        '
.,7.
: 2. , Local Law Enforcement Authorities - arrand(ments with the local law enforcement agencies for aid in the event of a security violation at the reactor faciliti should be described.
i
B.                     Access Control                                                                                     -
: 2., Local Law Enforcement Authorities - arrand(ments with the local law enforcement agencies for aid in the event of a security violation at the reactor faciliti should be described.
: 1.                 Pe,rsonnel - the categories of personnel who are authorized to enter security areas should be identified.
B.
              .                                        2.                 Control - the means employed to control access to security areas should be aescribed.
Access Control 1.
C.                     Surveillance - Plans for providing surveillance of essential equipment and security areas durinp working and non-working hours should be Gescr1bec.
Pe,rsonnel - the categories of personnel who are authorized to enter security areas should be identified.
D.                     Procedures - procedures and plans for dealing with the following situations should be Bri.efly described:
2.
: 1.                 Response to detected unauthorized intrusions of security                           '
Control - the means employed to control access to security areas should be aescribed.
areas.
C.
: 2.                 Security violations by authorized personnel.
Surveillance - Plans for providing surveillance of essential equipment and security areas durinp working and non-working hours should be Gescr1bec.
: 3.                 Bomb threats.
D.
Procedures - procedures and plans for dealing with the following situations should be Bri.efly described:
1.
Response to detected unauthorized intrusions of security areas.
2.
Security violations by authorized personnel.
3.
Bomb threats.
4.
Acts of civil disorder.
Acts of civil disorder.
: 4.                                                            .
E.
E.                    Security Prooram Review
Security Prooram Review 1.
: 1.                 The security program should be reviewed not less frequently                                   .
The security program should be reviewed not less frequently i
i than once every two years by the indi9(dual designated in item II.A.1. This provision should be documented in the
than once every two years by the indi9(dual designated in item II.A.1.
                                  .                                        security plan itself.     In this connection the licensee is directed to the provisions of 10CFR50.54(p).
This provision should be documented in the security plan itself.
k e.. . . e e- *-e ,o         .-          . . . . s                               e. =
In this connection the licensee is directed to the provisions of 10CFR50.54(p).
k e..
e e-
*-e
,o s
e.
=


E   -
E
g,
..s g,
        '.                                      ..s ii555 Attachment D w_
Attachment D ii555 w_
DISTRIBUTION:               -
DISTRIBUTION:
AEC PDR                         [.:.--
AEC PDR
Local PDR                       !"+E ORB Re'ading               . [2ZZ:
[.:.--
                                                                    ;.              p 1'81374                       KRGoller                       . !"E:E iocket No.                 50-142                             ?-                                               TJCarter               ,        [~~-
Local PDR
GLear                             p==.
!"+E ORB Re'ading
DJaffe               ,
. [2ZZ:
i--
p 1'81374 KRGoller
              ',.-                                                                                                    SATeets                           r---
. !"E:E iocket No.
                                                                                                                                                  .. ". =
50-142
The Regents of the' University-                                                                   extra copies'      ,
?-
of California                              l TFlood            % ,,;,,   , # i--;d t
TJCarter
Nuclear Energy Laboratory 4 . .                                                                               9       #            ;= =
[~~-
ATTN: Mr. Thomas E.111cks                 '
GLear p==.
[5"5 Director             -
DJaffe i--
los Angles, California *: !}'
SATeets r---
j'}
extra copies'
                                                                                                                                    ,                      idh Err =
... =
r.= ==
The Regents of the' University-TFlood
centlemen:                         i                 '
%,,;,,, # i--;d of California l
                                                          . < ; .. , s .                   ,    s                                                       ---
t Nuclear Energy Laboratory 4..
Tour letter of Octobert28,,?1974 sta'ed                       t    t. hat UCLA was considering methods'                         J _..
9
to reduce their Special! Huhl. ear Material inventory bslow the forcula                                                             [jl':
;= =
ATTN: Mr. Thomas E.111cks
[5"5 Director los Angles, California *: !}'
idh j'}
Err =
r.===
centlemen:
i
. < ;.., s.
s sta'ed t. hat UCLA was considering methods' J _..
Tour letter of Octobert28,,?1974 t
to reduce their Special! Huhl. ear Material inventory bslow the forcula
[jl':
quantity specified in Title'10 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 73.
quantity specified in Title'10 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 73.
                                                        -l-                                                                                                 .
-l-As of this date we bave ist received a written confircation that you EMJJ have reduced your Special Nuclear Material inventory nor have we received 555 a request to review your security plan assuming the inventory was reduced.
As of this date we bave ist received a written confircation that you                                                                 EMJJ have reduced your Special Nuclear Material inventory nor have we received                                                           555 a request to review your security plan assuming the inventory was reduced.                                                           E.M.}..
E.M.}..
You are reminded that your ' original plan, as submitted, was not acceptable                                                         ;==3.-
You are reminded that your ' original plan, as submitted, was not acceptable
and that you may be in' violation of Titic 10, Code of Federal Regulations,                                                         ties Part 73. Moncompliance with the Regulations would require that appropriate                                                           EEE-enforcement action be 'taken 'by us.
;==3.-
                                                                                                                                                            =M ===
and that you may be in' violation of Titic 10, Code of Federal Regulations, ties Part 73. Moncompliance with the Regulations would require that appropriate EEE-enforcement action be 'taken 'by us.
Tour response is requested dthin seven days of the receipt of this letter.                                                           'i5IE
=M
                                                                                                                                                              .*:.=..%.
 
Sincerely,                                                             J..}E..
===
M. rid Original Signed                                                   f:5''
Tour response is requested dthin seven days of the receipt of this letter.
                                                                                                                                                                          =
'i5IE
George Lear, Chief                                                     525 5.
. :.=..%.
i               Operating Reactors Branch #3 Directorate of Licensing i=1 g::.
Sincerely, J..}E..
t E. 5...
M. rid Original Signed f
                                                                        ;                                                                                            =;:.:
:5''
=
George Lear, Chief 525 5.
i Operating Reactors Branch #3 Directorate of Licensing i=1 g::.
E. 5...
t
=;:.:
EE Ukii-
EE Ukii-
:5.
:5.
                    , , , , , , ,  ORB #3             0 $)T:
ORB #3 0 $)T:
                                                                                  ~
it!!
it!!
~
L::...
L::...
                                                                                                                                                                    ; 7" ,
; 7",
ou.          av      Ma f1.                                   .    .                    ..                    ..
Ma f1.
                        ..n*        11./I/74           112] d.74
ou.
        ,. ac.ns :an. s.m McM 0240
a v 11./I/74 112] d.74
* v.s.eovea===at m m eorrics' m * "*.m                                             !":
..n*
:. . . = -:                                             ==:::::g:._ = :.   + :: Q.; "=:.~i"   ~' "=   .
,. ac.ns :an. s.m McM 0240
:.= = ~=;                              ..
* v.s.eovea===at m m eorrics' m * "*.m
:... = -:
 
==:::::g:._ = :.
+ :: Q.; "=:.~i"
~' "=
:.= = ~=;
 
.. y Attrchment E
:.=...a
 
==:=:
DISTRIBUTIONL
'~
AEC PDR JAn 8 W5 ibcket
'=
BGoller j/
TJCarter
\\\\ F
~
10aEEe
'=====
^
Docket No. 50-142-0 g
oac
:======
Ro (3) 2E--
The Regents of the thiversity GLear of California ACRS (16)
Nuclear Energy Laboratory ATTN: Mr. Thomas E. Hicks extra cps "I
d Director


  .. y Attrchment E
==
:.=.. .a  .
los Angeles, California 90024 Gentlemen:
                                                                                                                                                  ==:=:
e" We have reviewed your reactor security plan dated August 21, 1974, and the revision dated August 29, 1974.
                                '~
''"!j}s Based upon your reduction in Sef inventory, connunicated
                                                                  .                                    DISTRIBUTIONL 8 W5            -
-in your {{letter dated|date=December 12, 1974|text=letter dated December 12, 1974}}, we find that your plan complies with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50 Section 50.34 (c) and is acceptable.
AEC PDR JAn                                                                            _.              .
Sincerely, f.
ibcket                                    '=
BGoller                              j/ .
TJCarter                          \\ F
                                                                                                                                            ~
                                                                                                                                                  '=====
10aEEe Docket No. 50-142-
                                                                                                            ^
0          g oac                                        :======
Ro (3)                                    2E--
The Regents of the thiversity                                        GLear of California Nuclear Energy Laboratory                                            ACRS (16) extra cps ATTN: Mr. Thomas E. Hicks Director                                                  "I d                                                ==
los Angeles, California 90024 Gentlemen:                                                                                                             e" We have reviewed your reactor security plan dated August 21, 1974, and the revision dated August 29, 1974.                                                       ''"!j}s Based upon your reduction in Sef inventory, connunicated                                                                     *
                                    -in your {{letter dated|date=December 12, 1974|text=letter dated December 12, 1974}}, we find that your                                     ,
plan complies with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50                                                                     ""'
Section 50.34 (c) and is acceptable.
Sincerely,                                                     ,
                                                                                                                                                          . f.
Original SigJn E
Original SigJn E
                                                                                                              .a t                                 .
.a t
_ _.. .:.~2:.
_ _...:.~2:.
                                                                                                                                                    .sE George Lear, Chief                                                   W=
.sE George Lear, Chief W=
Operating Reactors Brandt #3 Directorate of Licensing
Operating Reactors Brandt #3 Directorate of Licensing
                                                                                                                                                      .e.          ..
.e.
                                                                                                                                                      .,.Ti& .,.,... ..!.
.Ti&.
E.. ...
E.....
                                                                                                                                      .e o F *
.e ORB #3 ORBP3 o F *
* C r **
* C r **
ORB #3                                      ORBP3
L sated d., IUa GLear dr/=.-
                                                    ._      L         .                          .
2.:.
              , , , . . .          sated d ., IUa                           GLear dr/=.-                                                             2.:.
.1L._.4 7.5 IL 2 _/15.
                    .*            .1L._.4     7.5 IL 2 _/15.           1/ g           I.S._    .. ...                . . . _
1/ g I.S._
        ~
~
:. . AIC.)l) 4 Rev. 915) A2C4 0 40                  a          1'? u. s. oova n= e=v .a'=te=e o a sic s. s ete.es.. ee
1'? u. s. oova n=
e=v.a'=te=e o a sic s. s ete.es.. ee
:.. AIC.)l) 4 Rev. 915) A2C4 0 40 a


UN!"VF.llSITY Ol? cal.11roWia,TiiS ANURTRO                                     -- 3                 Attachment F
UN!"VF.llSITY Ol? cal.11roWia,TiiS ANURTRO
  -        .                                                                                        N-I     gANTA StAnastAttA . siANTA t rttf4 4j
-- 3 Attachment F N-I gANTA StAnastAttA. siANTA t rttf4
  . CF
.atal tTV
        .atal tTV
* DAVl4
* DAVl4
* litTINK
* litTINK
* 9.6915 A$st;. f.FA . StavFittlleet
* 9.6915 A$st;. f.FA. StavFittlleet
* RAN latYs:n . IRAN FetANt;tstys bY SClifM)t.DF ENGINEEltlNG ANU All'I.lF.la M:IENCE 1.05 ANGELIJ, cal.!FOl4NIA 90es24
* RAN latYs:n. IRAN FetANt;tstys 4j CF bY SClifM)t.DF ENGINEEltlNG ANU All'I.lF.la M:IENCE 1.05 ANGELIJ, cal.!FOl4NIA 90es24
                                                                                                                            ..-            >~
>~
/,..(
September 30, 1976
September 30, 1976
                                                                                                                          ,;                    /,..(
; -s t
t
f:1M,,.bh i
                                                                                                                                                ; -s
.0CT7 1976> 3 p
                                                                                                                  ,"            f:1M,, .bh i           .0CT7 Mr. Bernard C. Rusche, Director p                        1976> 3 u,,,,ivar.u.wicu Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation                   ,    ,
u,,,,ivar.u.wicu Mr. Bernard C. Rusche, Director f,
f,              %fg4 y *,                   D United States Nuc1 car Regulatory Commission                                                             /'r Washington, D. C. 20555                                    Docket 50-142                         .
%fg4 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation y *,
                                                                                                                                  ]' I3
D United States Nuc1 car Regulatory Commission
/'r Docket 50-142
]' I3 Washington, D. C.
20555


==Dear Mr. Rusche:==
==Dear Mr. Rusche:==
 
The attached Draft-Security Plan is intended to replace our existing,T approved Plan and Amendments thereto.of the existing Plan to the stat i
The attached Draft-Security Plan is intended to replace our existing,T i
and approval by a laboratory Security Comittee.
approved Plan and Amendments thereto.of the existing Plan to the stat and approval by a laboratory Security Comittee.                                                           f the ex-nor current planning demand immediate changes                                                                         llo-           in the greater flexibility to meet the increasing activity and changing space a cation / utilization within the Nuclear Energy Laboratory.
f the ex-nor current planning demand immediate changes in the llo-greater flexibility to meet the increasing activity and changing space a cation / utilization within the Nuclear Energy Laboratory.
Please note that the locations of clar= systan transducers (Figures 11,12, and 13) remain a portion of the Draft Plan, bitt that adoption of th Plan will remove the door-keying information from those figures to a written                                         .
Please note that the locations of clar= systan transducers (Figures 11,12, and 13) remain a portion of the Draft Plan, bitt that adoption of th Plan will remove the door-keying information from those figures to a written procedure status.
procedure status.                 ,
it is our intent to secure an " Approval in Principic" of the Draft Plan before proceeding with the creation of the Security Committee and the c During this lation of Written Procedures for approval by that committee T
it is our intent to secure an " Approval in Principic" of the Draft Plan before proceeding with the creation of the SecurityDuring                                              Committee this          and the c lation of Written Procedures for approval by that committee                                                                   T Security Plan.                                                                                                                   I The Draft Plan is believed to be in conformity with the requirements of Due to the sensitive nature of the contents of this letter,                                       !
Security Plan.
10 CPR Part 73.40.
I The Draft Plan is believed to be in conformity with the requirements of Due to the sensitive nature of the contents of this letter, !
we request that this document be withheld from public disclosure pursuant t Section 2.790 of 10 CFR Part 2.
we request that this document be withheld from public disclosure pursuant t 10 CPR Part 73.40.
4
4
                                                                                            /,
)
                                                                                                                                                  )
Section 2.790 of 10 CFR Part 2.
Siticc$cy,           I   ,
/,
I     -                                                                  l hvan Ca on, Director Nuclear Energy Laboratory CEA:NCO:vl ec:
Siticc$cy, I
Mr. V.N. Rizzolo, Chief, Safeguards Branch, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Co Region V, Suite 202, Walnut Creek Plaza,1990 N. California Blvd.
I l
Walnut Creek, California, 94596 20, 1976)
hvan Ca on, Director Nuclear Energy Laboratory CEA:NCO:vl Mr. V.N. Rizzolo, Chief, Safeguards Branch, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Co Region V, Suite 202, Walnut Creek Plaza,1990 N. California Blvd.
(In accordance with our letter of August                                                                 1u149
ec:
Walnut Creek, California, 94596 20, 1976) 1u149 (In accordance with our letter of August


Attechment G                                           .
Attechment G
                          '                                                                                                                                                        =:===
=:===
                                                                                                                                                                      //
e.
: e.              ...                                                                                                                                3                              _==
3
JUL 11 1977                                                                                       [..h;;..
//
_==
JUL 11 1977
[..h;;..
C::~~
C::~~
Docket No. 50-142     '
Docket No. 50-142 t
                                                                                        ~
~
t                                                                                                        $rr The Regents of.the University. u                                                                                                                             F==
$rr The Regents of.the University. u F==
                                                                                                                                                                                      ' ~~~
of California -
of California -
                                                                              ~'     ''
~'
ATTN: Mr. Harold V. Brown                                                                                                                                   =
' ~~~
Environmental Health                                                                                                                                       .
ATTN: Mr. Harold V. Brown
and Safety Officer                                                                                                                               :==
=
Los Angeles, California 90024                                                                                                                               ,j
Environmental Health and Safety Officer
                                                                                                                                                                                                      ~
:==
Gentlemen:
Los Angeles, California 90024
,j Gentlemen:
~
:"T**::'
:"T**::'
I am pleased to respond to the enclosed letter of May 27, 1977 which                                                                                         -"'
I am pleased to respond to the enclosed letter of May 27, 1977 which has been fomarded to me for reply. You fomarded a letter dated
has been fomarded to me for reply. You fomarded a letter dated                                                                                               ..'.lf".
..'.lf".
May 19, 1977- from Ivan Catton, Director, Nuclear Energy Laboratory.                                                                                         ===
May 19, 1977-from Ivan Catton, Director, Nuclear Energy Laboratory.
We have reviewed Dr. Catton's letter requesting (1) a clarification                                                                                         -= .
 
of the status of the UCLA Security Plan with regard to the Facility                                                                                         .T Operating License for the UCLA Training Reactor, and (2) whether the                                                                                               ME Security Plan is conceived as having radiological safety aspects that                                                                                       'iT interact with the license.                                                                                                                                         . lit With regard to the status of your Security Plan,10 CFR Part 50,                                                                                                           .e.
===
Section 50.34 " Contents of Application, Technical Information"                                                                                             : ..?
We have reviewed Dr. Catton's letter requesting (1) a clarification
and Section 50.54, " Conditions of Licenses" clearly require you to                                                                                         5.5 have a security plan and also provide guidance for making changes to the plan. Although your Security Plan is not specifically incorporated G
-=
.                                                                                                                                                                                    1.2E in your license, we consider it to be a part of the license.                                                           In fact.             ~
of the status of the UCLA Security Plan with regard to the Facility
we.are presently requesting licensees to agree to incorporating the                                                                                         ~ ==
.T Operating License for the UCLA Training Reactor, and (2) whether the ME Security Plan is conceived as having radiological safety aspects that
'iT interact with the license.
. lit With regard to the status of your Security Plan,10 CFR Part 50,
.e.
Section 50.34 " Contents of Application, Technical Information"
:..?
and Section 50.54, " Conditions of Licenses" clearly require you to 5.5 have a security plan and also provide guidance for making changes to G
the plan. Although your Security Plan is not specifically incorporated 1.2E in your license, we consider it to be a part of the license.
In fact.
we.are presently requesting licensees to agree to incorporating the
~==
~
security plan in the license by reference. We have already contacted
security plan in the license by reference. We have already contacted
                                                                                                                                                                                                ~~
..1
                                                                                                                                                                                              . .1 your staff on this subject.                                                                                                     *                                    ==
~~
                                                                                                                                                          ~~
your staff on this subject.
 
==
/._. --With regard to radiological safety aspects of your Security Plan,
~T.
~~
95
95
      / ._. --With regard to radiological safety aspects of your Security Plan,                                                                                                      ~T.
/
    /                  implementation of the plan provides reasonable assurance that sabotage                                                                     ,
implementation of the plan provides reasonable assurance that sabotage and the theft or diversion of Special Nuclear Material (SNft) willnnot take place.
,                        and the theft or diversion of Special Nuclear Material (SNft) willnnot take place. Theft of SNM can have radiological implications far in excess of those activities for which your license was issued. The                                                                                             .:. .
Theft of SNM can have radiological implications far in excess of those activities for which your license was issued.
securi.ty plan, thus, is similar to other safety related components of
The securi.ty plan, thus, is similar to other safety related components of
                                                                                                                                                                                        .=
.=
your facility in that it provides reasonable assurance that occurrences                                                                                       ~'
your facility in that it provides reasonable assurance that occurrences
which have unacceptable consequences will be prevented.                                                                                                            .
~'
                                                                                                                                                          -                          W
which have unacceptable consequences will be prevented.
                      ~-~*cMA
W
                                                                                                                                                                                        .i...
~-~*cMA
                                                                                                                                                                                      ~:.':.
.i...
                                                                                                                                                    ~
~:.':.
Mid=         -
~
                                  ..=.....;:s = = . :n
Mid=
                                      ==
..=.....;:s = =. :n
                                                            .      ..s =                 . . . . . .            ..
..s =
                    ... :.2-} :           ;..."f9f::: W 4.=i. Rf= qlll===' ;                                   .;gi                                           :=.:             .;.:::y.;..
... :.2-} :
                                          ,.=:=-                                                                 ;          ; .:..:
 
y,I.. :..:y :::.::.:.;: _ llk.' .
==
                                                                                                                                                                        ~
;.. f9f::: W 4.=i.
                                  'f*:'
Rf= qlll===' ;
5$k }}":5_5'55'5 } .5b
.;gi
                                              "~'.9;;=..
:=.:
                                                              . :.      g : .g                             ..c.       F7E.:
.;.:::y.;..
                          ~~"        ~
,.=:=-
                                                                                                                          ~
y.. :..:y :::.::.:.;: _ llk.'.
                                                              - ::=               ;=:.                  . . . .
~
_,K e
'f*:'
f
5$k }}":5_5'55'5 }.5b
                                                                                                                                                                          .-----w
,I
~~"
~
"~'.9;;=..
g :.g
..c.
F7E.:
_,K
~
- ::=
;=:.
e f
.-----w


a r                                             .
a r
s
s
                                                                                                                                                                            ===
 
    ..      e  The Regents of the University                 -  2-
===
* E""
The Regents of the University 2-E""
of California                                                                                                                                         '"! f5 g==:
e of California
'"! f5 g==:
hm==
hm==
If we can be of further assistance in this matter, please contact us.                                                                                     s:J-]-
If we can be of further assistance in this matter, please contact us.
                                                      ~
s:J-]-
Sincerely,                                                                                               EN
~
                                                                                                                                                                            .i .
Sincerely, EN
Original slined by                                                                                         E EE
.i.
                                                  '                                                                                                                              :=--
Original sl ned by E EE i
                                                                                                                                                                                - -~5-George Lear, Chief                                                                                           3*
:=--
Operating Reactors Branch #3                                                                                   2:
- -~5-George Lear, Chief 3*
Division of Operating Reactors                                                                             . . . . . . .
Operating Reactors Branch #3 2:
gc= .-
Division of Operating Reactors gc=.-


==Enclosure:==
==Enclosure:==
Letter dated May 27, 1977,                                                                                                                                   ~ . - - - . .
Letter dated May 27, 1977,
H. Brwn to E. Case                                                                                                                                     * = -
~. - - -..
cc:                                                                                                                                                       FM
H. Brwn to E. Case
                                                                                                                                                                              ==
* = -
University of California                                                                                                                                    .71.'
FM cc:
ATTN: Dr. Ivan Catton, Director                                                                                                                             EMB Nuclear Energy Laboratory                                                                                                                         .::M Los Angeles, California 90024                                                                                                                               .'.::?.if
 
                                                                                                                                                                              @5
==
                                                                                                                                                                              ;.lf;'.':
.71.'
DISTRIBUTION:                                                                                                                                               ' E=
University of California ATTN: Dr. Ivan Catton, Director EMB Nuclear Energy Laboratory
Docket                                                                                                                                                       : ;=2 ORB #3 Rdg NRC PDR                                                                                                                                                     ==
.::M Los Angeles, California 90024
inueergy                                             ,
.'.::?.if
3SI VStello                                                                                                                                                     =='
@5
KRGoller                                                                                                                                             -
;.lf;'.':
JMil1er                                                                                                                                                                 =".
DISTRIBUTION:
GLear DJaffe                                                                                                                                                          :}1~T~! ~
' E=
CParrish                                                                                                                                                     .5 Ol&E (3)
Docket
: ;=2 ORB #3 Rdg NRC PDR
 
==
inueergy 3SI VStello
 
=='
KRGoller JMil1er
:}1~T~!
=".
GLear DJaffe
~
CParrish
.5 Ol&E (3)
RClark ACRS (16)
RClark ACRS (16)
TBAbernathy JRBuchanan                                                                                                                                                         .,
TBAbernathy JRBuchanan File
File                                                                                                                                                                 '
::.=.
::.=.
:k 5:
:k 5:
Mi
Mi
: rzy.
: rzy.
                *SEE PREVIOUS YELLOW FOR CONCURRENCE                                                                                                                         q).l o,,,..,         ORB #3          SB                  ORB #3 ou .. . . . > *DJaffe: ace *RClark                   Glearb     -  .
*SEE PREVIOUS YELLOW FOR CONCURRENCE q).l ORB #3 SB ORB #3 o,,,..,
: e. ,
ou..... >
* 7/6/77       7/6/77               7/g(.[77 RC FORM 318 (946) MtCM 0240                 W w. e. sove n= ment ,n,=rine one,ca, sere . ese.ese a
*DJaffe: ace
*RClark Glearb 7/6/77 7/6/77 7/g(.[77
: e.,
* RC FORM 318 (946) MtCM 0240 W w. e. sove n= ment,n,=rine one,ca, sere. ese.ese a


      -                                                                                                    o                         .
o
W
' Attechment H j
                                                                                                                                ' Attechment H                     j ,,            ,
W p,
5
5
_                                                                                                                                                        ~
~
                                                                                                                                                        ,.                    p, A                     '
A
_s 6k JUN 2 81979 s                                     -
_s JUN 2 81979 6k s
MEMORANDUM FOR:                                                                                                                                                           .
MEMORANDUM FOR:
Robert Burnett, Director, Division of Safeguards, NMSS                                                         *"
Robert Burnett, Director, Division of Safeguards, NMSS
FROM:
'7 FROM:
                                                                                                                                                                                          ,        '7.
James R. Miller, Assistant Director for Site and Safeguards, 00R
James 00R R. Miller, Assistant Director for Site and Safeguards,


==SUBJECT:==
==SUBJECT:==
NEW COMMISSION PAPER ON
NEW COMMISSION PAPER ON
* UPGRADE RULE" I understand that you are pro'ceeding on the subject paper on a schedule that would have the paper to the Comission by Monday, July 2,1979 Since some
* UPGRADE RULE" I understand that you are pro'ceeding on the subject paper on a schedule that would have the paper to the Comission by Monday, July 2,1979 Since some of the Commiss' ion's questions were directed at reactors, I am available to assist you on whatever schedule you desire. My basic interests are:
                          -      of the Commiss' ion's questions were directed at reactors, I am available to assist you on whatever schedule you desire. My basic interests are:
1)
1)
As suggested by Commissioner Kennedy, the following footnote should be added to 573.55:
As suggested by Commissioner Kennedy, the following footnote should be added to 573.55:
Footnote:             In the physical protection of all nuclear reactors, the term "High Assurance" has the same meaning as the tem
Footnote:
                                                                    " Reasonable Assurance" as is used in reactor public health and safety determinations.
In the physical protection of all nuclear reactors, the term "High Assurance" has the same meaning as the tem
" Reasonable Assurance" as is used in reactor public health and safety determinations.
2)
2)
We suggest'that an urgent meettng be held with ELO to discuss some of the language that you presented to the Commission dealing with ". . .objec-tive       to provide high assurance. . . ." My specific concern is legal backup during a public hearing.                                               ,
We suggest'that an urgent meettng be held with ELO to discuss some of the language that you presented to the Commission dealing with "...objec-tive to provide high assurance...."
3)
backup during a public hearing.
As we have discussed, non-power reactors must be deferred from the Upgrade NRR believes the deferral will be for a period of about 2 - 3 yea of the indepth studies we will be conducting. During this period, we will 4
My specific concern is legal 3)
rely on 173.60 for those facilities with greater than formula quantities of                                                                             i
As we have discussed, non-power reactors must be deferred from the Upgrade NRR believes the deferral will be for a period of about 2 - 3 yea of the indepth studies we will be conducting.
                        -                  SSNM and 5173.40 and 73.47 for all othe.'s. This will maintain the status
4 During this period, we will rely on 173.60 for those facilities with greater than formula quantities of SSNM and 5173.40 and 73.47 for all othe.'s.
              -                          quo and closely parallels the coments of Chairman Hendrie. Also NRR will continue studying the need for a separate rule 'for non-power reactor                                                                             ,
This will maintain the status i
facilities and comence preparing such a rule should it be determined necessary.                                                                                                                                             {
quo and closely parallels the coments of Chairman Hendrie. Also NRR will continue studying the need for a separate rule 'for non-power reactor facilities and comence preparing such a rule should it be determined
4)
{
AstoanyinvestigationintotheSurryincident,itmustbefullycoord-I                                nated with NRR and I&E. We will provide any assistance necessary in this matter an;l a joint meeting laying out the plan of attack should be held prior to any efforts expended.
necessary.
: 4) AstoanyinvestigationintotheSurryincident,itmustbefullycoord-nated with NRR and I&E. We will provide any assistance necessary in this I
matter an;l a joint meeting laying out the plan of attack should be held prior to any efforts expended.
/
/
5 James R. illier, Assistant Director
5 James R. illier, Assistant Director for Site and Safeguards Division of Operating Reactors acsp2 w.
                                      -                                                                                      for Site and Safeguards Division of Operating Reactors
.~.c.>
: w.         acsp2
.............. ~.. ~..
                              .~.c.>         ........................                                          ~ ~ . - ~ ~ ~ " -
~ ~. - ~ ~ ~ " -
                                                                        . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . ~ . .
~ ~"" """ ""
                                                                                                                                        ~ ~"" """ ""           ~ " " " " ~ " " "               *
~ " " " " ~ " " "
                              .....>          ....................... . . ~ . . . . - - - ~ ~ .                 ~ ~ - " " " " " " -     " " " " " " " " " " " ' " " " " ' " "      """""".I"""" i unk         .....................      . . . . . . . . ~ . . " " " "         " " " * " " " " **      * " * " " " * * ' " ' '*
"""""".I"""" i
                                                                                                                                                                                              ""?"" ' i j m e pomu ne o. m xm on oree                                                           *=*-"""'"'""""*'"'""~"""'                                                                                   ~
.. ~.... - - - ~ ~.
~ ~ - " " " " " " -
""?"" ' i unk
........ ~.. " " " "
j m e pomu ne o. m xm on oree
* = * - " " " ' " ' " " " " * ' " ' " " ~ " " " '
~


                                                                                                                                                                      - - - -                          .. .. -..                  ....n             .-
....n
        .s-                                                                                                                                                                                 .                                                              .
.s-
~
i w
O v%
w
w
    ~
.2 kr Robert Burnett JUN 2 81973 i
. ..                      *v
ec:
* i
E. Howard. I&E R. Purple, SD F. Pagano
                                                                          ,                                  O  -
: 5. Ramos DISTRIBUTION:
                              %                            w                                                        .2                                           kr                                                         --
Central Files NRR Reading (P-428)
Robert Burnett                                                                                                                                               JUN 2 81973                                                       -
i              ec:     E. Howard. I&E R. Purple, SD F. Pagano
: 5. Ramos                                                     -
DISTRIBUTION:                                                                                                                                                       ,
Central Files                               '
NRR Reading (P-428)                                                                                                                                                                 '              '
S&S Reading J. tillier l
S&S Reading J. tillier l
l S&S/                          ShS/ DOR
l.
                      .n... e
... 5 R....-.D..O..R....
                                  ... 5amos R. . . .- ...A .D..O..R.
...A ShS/ DOR S&S/
                                                              .JIt         .....V....
.n... e amos
: s. . .
.JIt
                    -..a=.>       ..............C....... . . . . . . ' . . . . . . . .        .........................                      ..................                        . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.....V....
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  ....................i
s
: v. * .... 6. ./. 2. ...7.../.7 9......
-..a=.>
                                                            . . 6. . . .......
..............C............. '........
                                                              .               . . . . . 79
....................i
        , mcroam ne o.uir                       w                                 * .................. .. . ... ............                                                                                                                              ,
.... 6../. 2.. 7.../.7 9......
.. 6.......... 79
: v. *
, mcroam ne o.uir w


** / ,
** /
A                                                 UNITED STATES f
A UNITED STATES f
(,     3 t
(,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20565 q   w g *s.   *
3 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t
                        .                                                    AUG     9 1979               .
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20565 w
Mr. Don Alger University of Missouri Columbia, Missouri 65201                                               .
q g *s.
AUG 9 1979 Mr. Don Alger University of Missouri Columbia, Missouri 65201


==Dear Mr. Alger:==
==Dear Mr. Alger:==
==SUBJECT:==
==SUBJECT:==
SAMPLE PHYSICAL SECURITY PLAN FOR HON-POWER NUCLEAR REACTOR FACILITIES POSSESSING SPECIAL NUCLEAR MATERIAL CF MODERATE STRATEGIC SIGNIFICANCE                                                             -
SAMPLE PHYSICAL SECURITY PLAN FOR HON-POWER NUCLEAR REACTOR FACILITIES POSSESSING SPECIAL NUCLEAR MATERIAL CF MODERATE STRATEGIC SIGNIFICANCE The Comission has amended its regulations to require physical protection measures at non-power reactors, to detect theft of special nuclear material of moderat4 and low str.ategic significance. This new regulation ( 73.47) is designed to provide a level of protection equivalent to the.reconnendations of Information Circular 225 Rev.1 published by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Concurrently, the Commission published a regulatory guide entitled,
The Comission has amended its regulations to require physical protection measures at non-power reactors, to detect theft of special nuclear material of moderat4 and low str.ategic significance. This new regulation ( 73.47) is designed to provide a level of protection equivalent to the.reconnendations of Information Circular 225 Rev.1 published by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Concurrently, the Commission published a regulatory guide entitled,
" Standard Format and Content for the Licensee Physical Security Plan for the Protection of Special Nuclear Material of Moderate or Low Strategic Significance."
                  " Standard Format and Content for the Licensee Physical Security Plan for the Protection of Special Nuclear Material of Moderate or Low Strategic Significance."
Applicable non-power reactor licensees must meet these requirements for detectih j
Applicable non-power reactor licensees must meet these requirements for detectih j     of theft in addition to previous regulatory requirements for protection against sabotage. As a result of discussions with the non-power reactor licensees, we havedraftedtheattachedSamplePlanasanaidtouniformityandcompletenessin) the preparation of physical security plans.                                                                           ~
of theft in addition to previous regulatory requirements for protection against sabotage. As a result of discussions with the non-power reactor licensees, we havedraftedtheattachedSamplePlanasanaidtouniformityandcompletenessin) the preparation of physical security plans.
v       -
~
I would appreciate your coments on the proposed Sample Plan by September 15, 1979.
v I would appreciate your coments on the proposed Sample Plan by September 15, 1979.
Sincerel     ,_.4 W-           .''      jjl D Fran ' (Aagado Chief Reac' tor Saleg'uar,ds Development Branch Division of Operating Reactors
Sincerel
,_.4 W-jjl D Fran ' (Aagado Chief Reac' tor Saleg'uar,ds Development Branch Division of Operating Reactors


==Enclosure:==
==Enclosure:==
Propose'd Sample Plan e.
l
___--___-_-_-__A


Propose'd Sample Plan                                          -
Attachment J CONTAINS 10 CFR 2.790(d) INFORMATION
e.
*l,..
                                                                    -                              -                                                  l
a WITHHELD FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE Sample Physical Security Plan for Non-Power Nuclear Reactor Facilities Possessing Special Nuclear Material of Moderate Strategic Significance 9
                                                                                                              -________________:_____
* ___--___-_-_-__A
 
Attachment J           CONTAINS 10 CFR 2.790(d) INFORMATION
  *l,..       -
a WITHHELD FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE
                                                                                            )
Sample Physical Security Plan for Non-Power Nuclear Reactor Facilities Possessing Special Nuclear Material of Moderate Strategic Significance 9
Reactor Safeguards Development Branch Division of Operating Reactors Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission v
Reactor Safeguards Development Branch Division of Operating Reactors Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission v
      .-                                                                    +
+
l l                                                               .
l l
l l
l l
l l
l l
t l
t l
Revision 1 l                                                                           June 14, 1979 l
Revision 1 l
June 14, 1979 l


CONTAINS 10 CFR 2.790(d) INFORMATION
CONTAINS 10 CFR 2.790(d) INFORMATION
  *l WITHHELD FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE Table of Contents Pagg Purpose                                                               .
*l WITHHELD FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE Table of Contents Pagg Purpose General Performance Objectives Identification of Special Nuclear Material on Site Implementation General Site Layout Security Areas
General Performance Objectives Identification of Special Nuclear Material on Site Implementation General Site Layout Security Areas
' Controlled Access Areas (Use)
              ' Controlled Access Areas (Use)
Controlled Access Areas (Storage)
Controlled Access Areas (Storage)
Vital Areas N Detection Devices or Procedures Surveillance of Vital Areas.
Vital Areas N
Detection Devices or Procedures Surveillance of Vital Areas.
Preauthorization Screening Badging System Lock System Access Control Description Escori. System
Preauthorization Screening Badging System Lock System Access Control Description Escori. System
            \ earchS    Description                   ,
\\ earch Description S
Administrative and Security Organization Communication
Administrative and Security Organization Communication Response Procedures Material Transportation Requirements Receiver Requirements Export and Import Requirements Revision 1 June 14, 1979
,                  Response Procedures Material Transportation Requirements                                 .
Receiver Requirements Export and Import Requirements Revision 1 June 14, 1979


C'           '
C' CONTAINS 10 CFR 2.790(d) INFORMATION WITHHELD FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE Purpose
'                                                                  CONTAINS 10 CFR 2.790(d) INFORMATION WITHHELD FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE Purpose
'This security plan describes the physic'al protection system and security organization which will provide protection against radiological sabotage and detect the theft of special nuclear material at the Sample Facility.
                    'This security plan describes the physic'al protection system and security organization which will provide protection against radiological sabotage and detect the theft of special nuclear material at the Sample Facility.
It demonstrates compliance with 10 CFR 50.34(c), 10 CFR'73.40 and 10 CFR 73.47.
It demonstrates compliance with 10 CFR 50.34(c), 10 CFR'73.40 and 10 CFR 73.47.
Revision 1 June 14, 1979 a                     _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ -
Revision 1 June 14, 1979 a


a                                           s 7 ..
7 a
  . l.                                       UNITED STATES               At trchment K NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMYISSION
s At trchment K
    .                                    WASHINGTON, D. C. 2 css 5
. l.
    .-    Cecember 19, 1979                                             SECY-79-187C INFORMATION REPORT                                           gcyp For:           The Commissioners                                         '
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMYISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 2 css 5 Cecember 19, 1979 SECY-79-187C INFORMATION REPORT gcyp For:
d4N a          7 19 %
The Commissioners d4N 7
From:         William J. Dircks, Director                                   ,
19 %
k Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards           k                 g Thru:         Executive Director for Operations 8 p L A
a From:
* L g
William J. Dircks, Director k
Suoiect:       IMPACT OF THE SAFEGUARDS UPGRADE RULE ON NONPOWER h2 ACTOR LICENSEES                                                   .
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards k
Purocse:       To provide th~e Ccmmissioners with the following information: a status report on the impact of the Safeguards Upgrade Rule on the 22 nonpower reactor (NPR) licensees listed in SECY 79-187B; review of safeguards measures in force at NPRs; the status of the reevaluation of the 100 rem /hr at 3 . feet self protection exemption criterion; and the status of NRC staff reviews and               "
g Thru:
studies which might lead to giving safeguarcs credit for enrich-ment, type and form of the SSNM located at NPRs.
Executive Director for Operations 8 p L A L
Discussion:   Backorcund On July 24, 1979, the Commission helc an open meeting on the impact of the Safeguards Upgrade Rule on nonpower reactor licensees (SECY 79-1878). The discussion concerned the staff recommendation that nonpowet reactor licensees be defarred from implementing the requirements of the Safeguards Upgrade Rule and that in the interim the new Category II (573.67) physical protection requirements as well as the current (973.60) require-ments be applied to nonpower reactor licensees with greater than formula quantities of SSNM. During the meeting the Ccmmissioners asked questions concerning the numoer of Category I nonpower reactors that would oe subject to the physical protection recuirements of the Safeguards Upgrade Rule as well as what physical protection is presently in place at those nonpower reactors. The Commissic,ners were also concerned with what physical protecticn requirements were actually needed at Category I nonpower reactor facilities given the unique type form and enric N,ent level of the reactor fuel.       This concerr, was expressco in relation to the amount of time nonpower reactors shculd be deferred from imolementing the recairements of the Safecuards Uccrade Rule. The Cccmission asked the staff for an in.erim status reocrt in 120 days whicn would give a more cefinitive exolanation of the Category I nc power reactor prcolem and actions being taken tc cetermine the appropriate i
g Suoiect:
pnysical protect on   re':uirenents for these f acilities.     This Cc, mission pacer is the interim status report.
IMPACT OF THE SAFEGUARDS UPGRADE RULE ON NONPOWER h2 ACTOR LICENSEES Purocse:
To provide th~e Ccmmissioners with the following information:
a status report on the impact of the Safeguards Upgrade Rule on the 22 nonpower reactor (NPR) licensees listed in SECY 79-187B; review of safeguards measures in force at NPRs; the status of the reevaluation of the 100 rem /hr at 3. feet self protection exemption criterion; and the status of NRC staff reviews and studies which might lead to giving safeguarcs credit for enrich-ment, type and form of the SSNM located at NPRs.
Discussion:
Backorcund On July 24, 1979, the Commission helc an open meeting on the impact of the Safeguards Upgrade Rule on nonpower reactor licensees (SECY 79-1878).
The discussion concerned the staff recommendation that nonpowet reactor licensees be defarred from implementing the requirements of the Safeguards Upgrade Rule and that in the interim the new Category II (573.67) physical protection requirements as well as the current (973.60) require-ments be applied to nonpower reactor licensees with greater than formula quantities of SSNM.
During the meeting the Ccmmissioners asked questions concerning the numoer of Category I nonpower reactors that would oe subject to the physical protection recuirements of the Safeguards Upgrade Rule as well as what physical protection is presently in place at those nonpower reactors.
The Commissic,ners were also concerned with what physical protecticn requirements were actually needed at Category I nonpower reactor facilities given the unique type form and enric N,ent level of the reactor fuel.
This concerr, was expressco in relation to the amount of time nonpower reactors shculd be deferred from imolementing the recairements of the Safecuards Uccrade Rule.
The Cccmission asked the staff for an in.erim status reocrt in 120 days whicn would give a more cefinitive exolanation of the Category I nc power reactor prcolem and actions being taken tc cetermine the appropriate pnysical protect on re':uirenents for these f acilities.
This i
Cc, mission pacer is the interim status report.
Oca:ac.:
Oca:ac.:
C . "', Nulsen
C. "', Nulsen
: -7:131
: -7:131


D                                    (.-
T.
T.
4 Additionally eleven NPR licensees indicated that they could be exempted from the Upgrade Rule requirements based solely on the 100 rem /hr at 3 feet exemption as discussed earlier. However the licensees cited a variety of problems that they may encoun,ter.
D
Enclosure 2 enumerates these problems and includes a table that has been developed to give a quick breakdewn by licensee on the ease   withlevel.
(.-
radiation    which each one can maintain its fuel at the 100 rem /
4 Additionally eleven NPR licensees indicated that they could be exempted from the Upgrade Rule requirements based solely on the 100 rem /hr at 3 feet exemption as discussed earlier.
However the licensees cited a variety of problems that they may encoun,ter. enumerates these problems and includes a table that has been developed to give a quick breakdewn by licensee on the ease with which each one can maintain its fuel at the 100 rem /
radiation level.
Again it should be noted that some may not meet the radiation levels during short periods of time.
Again it should be noted that some may not meet the radiation levels during short periods of time.
One course of action that the staff is investigating is the idea of requiring increased physical protection, on an interim basis, for the NPR SNM during the periods it is not self ,
One course of action that the staff is investigating is the idea of requiring increased physical protection, on an interim basis, for the NPR SNM during the periods it is not self,
protecting.                                                    .
protecting.
Current NPR Safeauards Measures in Force Since late 1973 NPR licensees have been required to submit a         l physical   security plan as part of their application for a license to operate.
Current NPR Safeauards Measures in Force Since late 1973 NPR licensees have been required to submit a l
NPR licensees wno oossessed less than a formula quantity of SSNM were sucject to the provisions of 550.34(c) and 973.40 anc those who possessed more than a formula quantity of SSNM were subject to the provisions of 973.50 and 973.60, as applicable, in addition to 550.34(c) and 573.40. In 1974, the staff developed guidance in supoort of the foregoing           -
physical security plan as part of their application for a license to operate.
requirements to aid applicants and licensees in the development of security plans to protect reactors against acts of sabotage.
NPR licensees wno oossessed less than a formula quantity of SSNM were sucject to the provisions of 550.34(c) and 973.40 anc those who possessed more than a formula quantity of SSNM were subject to the provisions of 973.50 and 973.60, as applicable, in addition to 550.34(c) and 573.40.
The guidance was contained in 3 documents and was sent to aporopriate licensees. The guidance occucents addressed'sec-urity systems power    levels: that were applicable to NPRs of three different
In 1974, the staff developed guidance in supoort of the foregoing requirements to aid applicants and licensees in the development of security plans to protect reactors against acts of sabotage.
              >5000 kw.
The guidance was contained in 3 documents and was sent to aporopriate licensees.
The guidance occucents addressed'sec-urity systems that were applicable to NPRs of three different power levels:
>5000 kw.
(1) <250* kw, (2) >250 kw, but <5000 kw and (3)
(1) <250* kw, (2) >250 kw, but <5000 kw and (3)
All of the currently aporoved security plans for the reacters in cuestion were reviewed and analy:ad with respect to prevent-ing sabotage and a few were evaluated by NRR to determine the adequacy of their physical protection system to protect against the theft or diversion of SNM. All NPRs have been inspected against 1975-1979.
All of the currently aporoved security plans for the reacters in cuestion were reviewed and analy:ad with respect to prevent-ing sabotage and a few were evaluated by NRR to determine the adequacy of their physical protection system to protect against the theft or diversion of SNM.
their security olans for comoliance during the period While some items of noncccoliance have been noted, there was no adverse effect en public nealth and safety. In addition, staff members of NRR have visited and assessed 50 NPRs in the past two years.
All NPRs have been inspected against their security olans for comoliance during the period 1975-1979.
All 22 NPRs wnich SECY 79-1875 listed as Category I facilities, based on autneri:ed possession limits, have security systems in place and have teen inscected and fcund in concliance with their security plans -nich are based on present re:uirements under !50.3 (c), s73.40, 573.50 and 973.60, as applicabie     ,
While some items of noncccoliance have been noted, there was no adverse effect en public nealth and safety.
The ty-staffsecurity memoerssystems  at all 22 NPRs have ::een examined during visits of NER.                                               !
In addition, staff members of NRR have visited and assessed 50 NPRs in the past two years.
All 22 NPRs wnich SECY 79-1875 listed as Category I facilities, based on autneri:ed possession limits, have security systems in place and have teen inscected and fcund in concliance with their security plans -nich are based on present re:uirements under !50.3 (c), s73.40, 573.50 and 973.60, as applicabie The security systems at all 22 NPRs have ::een examined during visits ty-staff memoers of NER.
i
i
                                                                                      /
/
            'ints is tne Category limit for TRIGA reactors, the training rea tor limit was > cr <100 kw.
'ints is tne Category limit for TRIGA reactors, the training rea tor limit was > cr <100 kw.


  ~
~
Attachment L
Attachment L
[
[
t
t
{
{
f V-Ftf Nuclear foes: Temxists may attack UCLA reactor UCLA's nuclear reactor could be the target of aLOS ANG possible terrorist attack during the 1984 Olymples, and have asked the federal government to shut it down                                                   {
Nuclear foes: Temxists f V-Ftf may attack UCLA reactor UCLA's nuclear reactor could be the target of aLOS ANG possible terrorist attack during the 1984 Olymples, and have asked the federal government to shut it down
{
before the Summer Games.
before the Summer Games.
              'Ihc Committee to Bridge the Gap said in papers filed                 1 f security plan for the 23 year-old research rea with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that the
f security plan for the 23 year-old research re
        , des to protect against sabotage.
'Ihc Committee to Bridge the Gap said in papers filed with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that the 1
j" maintained that reseArch reacttook the                               s same position in separate paper, l
, des to protect against sabotage.
      '~  federal regulation to have sabotageors                   are not required by tection.
j" maintained that reseArch reacttook the same position in separate paper s
1he NRC Atomic Safety and                                           -l ng Board is scheduled to examine the security question when relicensing hearing continue next month.                                                             (
l federal regulation to have sabotageors are not required by
Reactor enough time         ents said this means there will not im the board decides such an action is needed; remove the fuel before the Olympic
'~
                                                                                                                \
1he NRC Atomic Safety and tection.
-l scheduled to examine the security question when ng Board is relicensing hearing continue next month.
(
Reactor enough time ents said this means there will not im the board decides such an action is needed; remove the fuel before the Olympic
\\
i I
i I
[
[
                                                .. __ _ _ _ __}}
- _ _}}

Latest revision as of 13:03, 13 December 2024

Forwards Attachments to 840509 Response to Applicant Request for Reversal of ASLB 840413 Finding of Matl False Statements
ML20090J791
Person / Time
Site: 05000142
Issue date: 05/10/1984
From: Aftergood S
COMMITTEE TO BRIDGE THE GAP
To: Bright G, Frye J, Luebke E
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
OL, NUDOCS 8405230240
Download: ML20090J791 (25)


Text

d'N

  • e COMMITTEE TO BRIDGE THE GAP 1637 BUTLER AVENUE #203 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90025 00CKETED (213) 478 0829 USNRC May 10, fS$4 MY 22 All :39 John H. F rye, III, Chairman Dr. Errrneth A. Luebke Glenn O. Bright Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.

20555 in the Matter of THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CAllFORNIA (UCt.A Research Reactor)

Docket No. 50-142 Ok (Proposed Renewal of Facility License)

Dear Administrative Judges:

Enclosed please find the attachments to "CBG Response to Applicant's Request for Reversal of the Board's April 13 Finding of Haterial False Statements" (May 9,1984).

Sincerely yours,

.4 ji f

W GQ Steven Aftergood

/

y i

cc w/ enclosures: service list 8405230240 840510 PDR ADOCK 05000142 0

PDR

  • }

t i

(

Attachments to "CBG RESPONSE TO APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR REVERSAL OF THE BOARD'S APRIL 13 FINDING OF MATERIAL FALSE STATEMENTS" (May 9,1984)

(

Attachment A Letter of November 30, 1973 from AEC's Donald J.

Skovholt.to UCLA's NEL (1 page)

Attachment B Regulatory Guide 1.17 (2 pages) o Attachment C Letter of July 15, 1974 f rom Karl R. Goller to UCLA's= NEL with 2 enclosures: (t) deficiencies in UCLA proposed securlty plan; (2)

Interim Guidance for Organization and Content of Security

(

Plans (5 pages)

Attachment D Letter of November 18, 1974 f rom George Lear to HEL (I page)

Attachment E Letter oi January 8,1975 f rom' George Lear to NEL (1 page) cAttachment F Letter of" September 30, 1976 from UCLA's Ivan Catton-to NP.C, l'ndicating compliance with 10 CFR l

/

73.40 (1 page)

Attachment G' Letter of Julyfil,1977 f rom George Lear to UCLA

.(2pagns):

' Attachment H Memorandum of Ju.nc 28, 1979 from James R. Miller

(

to Robert Burnett (2 pages)

Attachment i Letter of ragust' 9,1979 from Frank Pagano (1 page)

(

' Attachment J Excerpts from Svnple Physical Security Plan, Revision I, June 14, 1979 (3 pages)

Attachment ~K Excerpts f rom SECY-79-187C,-December 19, 1979 (2 pages) e Attachment'll Uni ted Press, international wi re service story, January 4,1984 (1 page)

(

1 e

e i

Attechmont'A

,{

d,'y,

= = =,

,V UNITED STATES 3.:~E 2

.\\ [ N

't ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION h:1

  • Y*

W ASHINGTON, D.C. 20545 1.....

5,,

ly >

EEE":

%ne

. - lF#

November 30, 1973 kst No.-50-142 l;;;

.......b._.;

The Regents of the University

.:::sGl:.

of California Nuclear Energy Laboratory

e. -

ATTN:

Mr. Thomas E. Hicks Director 1.os Angeles, California 90024 Gentlemen:

V..

=i2$

On hbvember 6,1973, the Commission adopted amendments to its regulations E05 in 10 CFR Parts 50, 70, and 73 which are to strengthen the physical

.Z protection of reactor facilities and of special nuclear s terials. The f...........

new mies require in part that licensees of pmduction and utilization

!E F facilities submit a physical security plan to the Comission by January 7, 1974. A copy of the amendments is enclosed for your use.

. ~:;.~,

.:= ::

Tne submitted plan should be as described in the new 10 CFR Part 50.34(c) and comply with the requirements stated in the new Part 73. Regulatory

\\

~~1..

Guide 1.17, " Protection of hbclear Pcwer Plants Against Industrial l

..u.;

Sabotage", states an acceptable Regulatory position for complying with this requirement. Reactor facilities other than power reactors should

.se use the position in the Regulatory Guide to the extent practicable.

2

e If you have previously submitted a security plan, please review it with all applicable requirements of Part 73 are met by your plan, indicate

"~i,;...

respect to the requirements in these regulations.

If you conclude that this conclusion and provide specific reference to the plan.

If all

=

requirements are not met an amendment or revised plan should be filed.

Three copies of your plan should be submitted. Your letter of transmittal should request that the plan be withheld from public disclosure pursuant to Section 2.790 of 10 CFR Part 2.

I e

Sincerely,

. :. i. ;.'

.==

DonalaJ.Alovholt/h f fkh?

W

"==

Assistant Director for Operating Reactors eig.c:=.

Directorate of Licensing "9E=

.E=

Enclosure:

{

Amendments to 10 CFR Parts 50, 70, and 73 published November 6, 1973 4

1u p:

4%- o

... ~.. ':.

-~ -

Attechrnent B

'C s

n.' r l

/'g,a June 1973 U.S. ATp!IC ENERGY CEMMISClON

! R EGULATO RY GURDE 1

1 0

r c,' eras oi Dir.ECTORATE OF REGULATORY GTANDARDS i

REGULATORY GUIDE 1.17 f

PROTECTION OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS AGAINST INDUSTRIAL SABOTAGE i

. A, INTRODUCTION National Standards Committee NIS and is in final review by Be American National Standards Institute (ANSI)

On February 1,

1973, the Atomic Energy Board of Standards Review.

Commission had published in the Fedcral Regirte proposed amendments to its regulation in 10 CFR Part in addition to the procedural measures described in 50, "Umnsing of Production and Utihzation ANSI N18.17, the design of structures. systems. and Facilities." Proposed [ 50.55c would require each components important to safety (e.E., such features as beensee authorized to operate a nuclear reactor to redundancy, automation, independence. dh e rsity.

pronde appropriate protection against industrial protection against common-mode failures, and the s:botage. Proposed paragraph (c), " Physical Security placement of facilities and equipment) can also provide l

Plan

  • of { 50.34 would require each application for protection against acts ofindustrial sabotage.Therefore.

an operating licens: to include a physical security plan.

it is considered prudent to enhance this form of Proposed paragraph (p) of { 50.34 would require protection by protecting the vital equipment against existing licensees who have not submitted a physical surreptitious acts of industrial sabotage that could secunty plan to submit such a plan to the Commission impair the performance of its intended safety functions.

j for approval within 60 days after the publication of it is important that such protection be considered early

{

these amendments in effective form. Furthermore, in the design stage and that protective measures be

} 50.34 requires that an application for a construction described in the application for a construction permit.

permit melude the principal design criteria to be satisfied At a later stage, these measures would be described in in meeting the requirements for structures, systems,and greater detail in the applicant's security plan identified

{

components essential to safety This regulatory guide in proposed paragraphs (c) and (p) of Q 50.34.

describes physical security criteria that are Senerally acceptable for the protection of nuclear power plants C. REGULATORY POSITION against acts of industrial sabotage which could lead to a threat to the health and safety of the public. The The requirements and recommendations contained Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards has been in the proposed ANSI Standard N18.17. " Industrial

(

consuhed conceming this guide and has concurred in the Security for Nudear Pov er Plants,". dated March 23, regulatory position.

1973, are generally acceptable and, with due consideration for the unique characteristics of the plant B. DISCUSSION and its owner organaation, provide an adequate basis for I

a physical security plan for the prc,tection of nuclear Subcommittee ANS 3 of the Ameriern Nudcar power plants apinst industrial

sabotage, as Soacty St:.ndads Comnuttee has developed a standard supplemented by the following:

that proddes criteria for industrial security propams to protcer oparational nudear power plants from acts of 1.

Security Sytrems mdaunal sabotag which could lead to a threat to the a.

The plant *.ecurity forces should base onsite, health and safety of the pubbe. This sta*,dard, to be arrned, and uniformed ind.viduals w hose primary duties despa ted ANSI NIS.17. " Industrial Security for are the protection of facilities from acts that could Nudcar Pt wer Plams,"' has !;een reviewed by American endanpr the health and safety of the pubhc.

b.

All security alarms should annunciate in a

'( eries may te ottamed from the Amerian Nuc! car continuoasi) mant ed, ensite central klarm st2 tion and in Sme t). 44 E. OJgen Otnue. Hinsdale,In.noi 60521.

at least one other continuously tranned station not i

USAEc (EOULAToRY GUIDES coe.= ce vei.*=c pA<t e., to cc..,-s t,,=p

,6w g v. e..

r e

c...-.+ r.wi,f a-yv Co%. nee. w h.-co.s DE, rio.46, ce v s. Aie-ac o ee in a.

-v c -,. -... o-e Ae.~

..-,. ~ e.m e...

e i e P

., e.,. :...o

.. e

,e e,. p,w,

,,,o

,m,.,,.

r... ~,.~. C ~,

e,o

,,.re e.,

-,s.

e j

%,..,.n.s p..,..

. a t.

,, e,,e rer.ie.,

ve Cc-==eseres.

are. ens to :=2.

. i.esa w.

ae try v,s.te't en et see Cwesen. VA. A mes r *= s Cow =ncet wa t. ere. 0 2. Tir45.

    • 3+

m ei=ohr cre6a.*e or swer u e e<ewwam. o. so grew,,. p e. ace se A tie wr* Chet. PvtA P eas-Mn ! t.*t t

eeschesam Pey4ettre Gvw1.= e e cet a.rutstees f er rupletene.e eae ete.gu.%cs WWi%I*** b 8601 f.Geaire$ beethodh omd.rm.plere S iPf.rvet f.ty9 tb ts..et out apt De portWS.-9

  • rom eri t6e Sof >wey pas. tefarf das,ere f

P. ph.*fte. ell te m ses2tahe. el they gare,vt. a toe ne for e.g. f.p.*eq,, reg

...te to

'*45 'h t -tre e' coet***tre of a swarstel O' I ce"m. %.y f*.e CfunPwhaqq.

1. P 2.aae betterg f.

P 'tsbru 2 D r.=-ce. c Teet F c$res 7 Tes, w etee.

3 r..., e u, *, e F.( i.

.e, B e.: eer.'.-. snih P a 'arme e,. cme. 81 t=

w==e s. e.e ='iv.

a.icror.e o. to.w s wwwe a r...--.-,. s., qi 9 A m

.,e s e.

e tire ames auf to.w8 auct af o,an e te cy e gw e.sce

& W. ie...,.,ug P...sq P eg. w, ene, 10 C.r es

~

_~~

. _. - - - - ~

e t

necessarily onsite. A11 alarminhould be self checking and communication equipment, should be functionally t

, l,8 tamper indicating. Le annunctation of an alarm at the tested for operability at the commencement and ons!te central shrm station should indi:ste the type of completion of esch interval during utJch such alarm (e.g., intrualon alarm, emerp: rey exit alstm) and equ!pm:nt is used for se'eurity, but no less frequently location, ne annunciation at the other alarm station than once e:ch anen days.

should, as a rrinimum, provide indications that an b.

Communication equipment used for security intrusion or Chpl entry has occuned. De affected should be tested with a minimum frequency of once at armunciator should be reset only after satisfactory the beginning of each security force work shift.

communications have taken place between alarm stations. All intrusion alarms, emergency exit alarms, 3.

Protection of Vital Equiptrx nt alarm systems, and line supervisory systems should,as a Approprinte design fr.atures and equipment rninimum, meet the level of performance and reliability arrarEements should be provided and be consistent with indicated by GSA In Federal Spcification er sa ety requirunents to reduce 6e cpportunity for W.A 00450 A (GSA FSS)*,terim successful industrial ssbotage of stal equipment.To the extent feasible, these features should include measures 2.

Equipment Teeting to protect gainst undetected intentionalacts that could a.

Security related equipment, except for impair equiptrient perforracnce, such as automatic

'Ceples reay be obtained from budness service centers of the General Services Adminisustion Reponal Offices located in th' f E*

  • i 'E *i**

Detailed s-curity measures for the. physical Protection of the facility against indtistrialsabotage will rnston. Mn a.

Denver.colo.

Kansa s City, Mo.

Nr York. N.Y.

San Francisen, Ca.

tes Argeles.Ca.

be withheld from pJblic discloture as provided in wnMr,rt on. D.C.

Atlanta Ga.

Seattle. Wash.

I 2.790 of the Commission's regulations in 10CFR Ft. Worth. Te nas Chicago, Itt.

Part 2.

1. I i.'
/

Attachment C N

'STRIBUTION t

acket File AEC PDR(w/o encl.1)

,y ::7 Branch Reading 1)i===:5 JRBuchanan, ORNL (w/o eacl. ;.:::

RO (3)

JUL.1 5 1974 KRColler, L:0R RAPeepie r-LtGR-1

'... " 'r:

IfBranchChief,OR

- - - ~ ~

Docket No. 50-142 Project Manager, OR

,.The Regents of the University Y#

Licensing Assistant, OR d

of California TPFlood, L:0R-1 Nuclear Energy Laboratory TJCarter, L:0R ATTN:

Mr. Thomas E. Ricks SVarga, L:RP Director OGC Los Angeles, California RBouston, L:0SB y-~.

?

~::..':

=

....!.'.5.5:

Gentlemen:

"EEE

.EsE" We have reviewed your proposed security plan dated January 14, 1974.

At this -time, we are unable to complete our evaluation with the infor-

==!!:

mation provided. Enclosure 1 identifies deficiencies in your plan with

=

respect to the interim guide, enclosure 2, against which your plan was

=E s evaluated.

(Enclosure 2 titled " Interim Guidance.- Organization and

.:=55:

Content of Security Plans for Power Easaarch and Training Rasctors"

~==

is furnished for your asidance.)L "

l=5.~Ji

=. =.

E We request that you smend your plan to incorporate the information indi-cated in the interin guide. Also, identify any feature of your plan c.E that cannot be implemented within 30 days and describe the interim

E meaqures that would be taken to provide an equivalent level of protection.

. i= :

We request that your revised plan be submitted within 30 days from the date of this letter. Your security plan submittal is exempt from public 18 9 diaelosure pursuant to 10 CFR Part 2, Section 2.790(d) and should be so

"= E marked when transmitted.

'lig.

Sincerely, i

_ =.:

Original Signed by,

"~9 Karl Gouer Karl R. Coller, Assistant Director for Operating Raactors Directorats of Licensing

..:.=;.

EEis

Enclosures:

....E 1.

Request for Additional Information

!!=!jii;.

2.

Interim Guidance

=: -

T N.h 5=

L:0R-1 L:0 RPM g _ n L:0RBC.,,

L:0R g gf, hh

. J.i:

o,nc.,

Ms i m er

.==

TPFlood:dc DJaff(

Gledr KRGoller

.u.....,

N[74 7/ l$ /7 7/ /f' /74 6//.2/74

.m >

e C..... Lv. 9 5 )) ARCM 0240 W u; s. eovsma. ant paiurene carie se t e7..eas-tes

..J.:'

m s.

M' f

't WITHHELD FRO:4 PUBLIC. DISCLOSURE

(

4 Docket lio. 50-142 5

Enclosure i:o.1 The foflowing' paragraph nu.ders refer to th.ose sections of the

(

interim guidance document (Enclosure 2) which are not addressed in sufficient detail to permit a thorough evaluation of your security plan.

w Paraora oh 'i!o.

Subject I.A.

Essential Equipment I.B.

Security Area I. C. '

Security Systems II.A.

Organization

. II.B.

Access Control

(

II.C.

Surveillance II.D.

Procedures II.E.

Security Program !!eview You are reminded that since your license authorizes possession of Stiti in excess of 5. kilograms U-235, that compliance with 10CFR73.50 and 73.60 would be required if your inventory of non-exempt S!N equals or exceeds the formula quahtity specified in,14CFR73.1.

WITHHELD FRG:4 PUBLIC DISCLOSURE L'

e

.h

.-..,n.

...,..,....r.

...-.~..:..

..... > -.,. ~. -

, -,. ~. -.

.,._.a...

o

q'

{,

Enclosura 2 Interim Guidance - Orgaaization and Cpntent of Security Plans for Lou Po.ler Research and Training Reactors Applicability - This interim guidance is for use in developing and evaluatinc security plans for low power research and training reactors.

For purposes of this guide, these reactors are defined as'TRIGA reactors with authorized power

~ levels less than or equal to 250 KW and all other researen and training reactors with power levels less than or equal to 100 K.l, including AG'I's, zero power, and critical facilities.

o

~

Purpose - The purpose of the security plan developed according to this guidance is to protect the reactor against acts of sabotage.

It is intended for use by the licensee to demonstrate compliance with 10CFR50.34(c) and 10CFR73.40.

Conformance with this guide will not assure compliance with 10CFR73.50 and 10CFR73.60, if these parts are applicable to tne license'e.'

[l

~

1.

Design Features A.

Essential Equipment - Essential equipment should be designated in the security plan.

This should include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following:

the reactor, the reactor coolant system, reactor controls, and any associated equipment the m

9

.,..+,....o....

a.w

..o

.....,... s a

.a.,

(

4 failure of which could endanger ~ the health and safety of the.public.

B.

Security Area - security areas should be identified and described, including plan drawings or s' ketches showing these in context of the site location and showing access points.

At least the fuel storage area, the reactor control room, and the reactor room or building sho,uld be described as security areas.

C.

Security Systems Locks and Keys - a d'scription of the lock and k.ey system 1.

e should be provided; describe how keys 'are controlled; ioent1Ty tne specific individuci (*uy positivo LiLie) responsible for the security of the keys.

2.

Communications - the.. communication system to be used in the event of a security violation should be described.

II.

Administrative Controls A.

Organization 1.

Security organization - the person responsible for the facility security program should be identified (by position title); the person (s) or group (s) having security functions and responsibilities on a day to day basis should be identified.

.._4,.._,.....

.y...-_.__..

.,7.

i

2., Local Law Enforcement Authorities - arrand(ments with the local law enforcement agencies for aid in the event of a security violation at the reactor faciliti should be described.

B.

Access Control 1.

Pe,rsonnel - the categories of personnel who are authorized to enter security areas should be identified.

2.

Control - the means employed to control access to security areas should be aescribed.

C.

Surveillance - Plans for providing surveillance of essential equipment and security areas durinp working and non-working hours should be Gescr1bec.

D.

Procedures - procedures and plans for dealing with the following situations should be Bri.efly described:

1.

Response to detected unauthorized intrusions of security areas.

2.

Security violations by authorized personnel.

3.

Bomb threats.

4.

Acts of civil disorder.

E.

Security Prooram Review 1.

The security program should be reviewed not less frequently i

than once every two years by the indi9(dual designated in item II.A.1.

This provision should be documented in the security plan itself.

In this connection the licensee is directed to the provisions of 10CFR50.54(p).

k e..

e e-

  • -e

,o s

e.

=

E

..s g,

Attachment D ii555 w_

DISTRIBUTION:

AEC PDR

[.:.--

Local PDR

!"+E ORB Re'ading

. [2ZZ:

p 1'81374 KRGoller

. !"E:E iocket No.

50-142

?-

TJCarter

[~~-

GLear p==.

DJaffe i--

SATeets r---

extra copies'

... =

The Regents of the' University-TFlood

%,,;,,, # i--;d of California l

t Nuclear Energy Laboratory 4..

9

= =

ATTN: Mr. Thomas E.111cks

[5"5 Director los Angles, California *: !}'

idh j'}

Err =

r.===

centlemen:

i

. < ;.., s.

s sta'ed t. hat UCLA was considering methods' J _..

Tour letter of Octobert28,,?1974 t

to reduce their Special! Huhl. ear Material inventory bslow the forcula

[jl':

quantity specified in Title'10 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 73.

-l-As of this date we bave ist received a written confircation that you EMJJ have reduced your Special Nuclear Material inventory nor have we received 555 a request to review your security plan assuming the inventory was reduced.

E.M.}..

You are reminded that your ' original plan, as submitted, was not acceptable

==3.-

and that you may be in' violation of Titic 10, Code of Federal Regulations, ties Part 73. Moncompliance with the Regulations would require that appropriate EEE-enforcement action be 'taken 'by us.

=M

=

Tour response is requested dthin seven days of the receipt of this letter.

'i5IE

. :.=..%.

Sincerely, J..}E..

M. rid Original Signed f

5

=

George Lear, Chief 525 5.

i Operating Reactors Branch #3 Directorate of Licensing i=1 g::.

E. 5...

t

=;:.:

EE Ukii-

5.

ORB #3 0 $)T:

it!!

~

L::...

7",

Ma f1.

ou.

a v 11./I/74 112] d.74

..n*

,. ac.ns :an. s.m McM 0240

  • v.s.eovea===at m m eorrics' m * "*.m
... = -:

==:::::g:._ = :.

+ :: Q.; "=:.~i"

~' "=

.= = ~=;

.. y Attrchment E

.=...a

==:=:

DISTRIBUTIONL

'~

AEC PDR JAn 8 W5 ibcket

'=

BGoller j/

TJCarter

\\\\ F

~

10aEEe

'=====

^

Docket No. 50-142-0 g

oac

======

Ro (3) 2E--

The Regents of the thiversity GLear of California ACRS (16)

Nuclear Energy Laboratory ATTN: Mr. Thomas E. Hicks extra cps "I

d Director

==

los Angeles, California 90024 Gentlemen:

e" We have reviewed your reactor security plan dated August 21, 1974, and the revision dated August 29, 1974.

"!j}s Based upon your reduction in Sef inventory, connunicated

-in your letter dated December 12, 1974, we find that your plan complies with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50 Section 50.34 (c) and is acceptable.

Sincerely, f.

Original SigJn E

.a t

_ _...:.~2:.

.sE George Lear, Chief W=

Operating Reactors Brandt #3 Directorate of Licensing

.e.

.Ti&.

E.....

.e ORB #3 ORBP3 o F *

  • C r **

L sated d., IUa GLear dr/=.-

2.:.

.1L._.4 7.5 IL 2 _/15.

1/ g I.S._

~

1'? u. s. oova n=

e=v.a'=te=e o a sic s. s ete.es.. ee

.. AIC.)l) 4 Rev. 915) A2C4 0 40 a

UN!"VF.llSITY Ol? cal.11roWia,TiiS ANURTRO

-- 3 Attachment F N-I gANTA StAnastAttA. siANTA t rttf4

.atal tTV

  • DAVl4
  • litTINK
  • 9.6915 A$st;. f.FA. StavFittlleet
  • RAN latYs:n. IRAN FetANt;tstys 4j CF bY SClifM)t.DF ENGINEEltlNG ANU All'I.lF.la M:IENCE 1.05 ANGELIJ, cal.!FOl4NIA 90es24

>~

/,..(

September 30, 1976

-s t

f:1M,,.bh i

.0CT7 1976> 3 p

u,,,,ivar.u.wicu Mr. Bernard C. Rusche, Director f,

%fg4 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation y *,

D United States Nuc1 car Regulatory Commission

/'r Docket 50-142

]' I3 Washington, D. C.

20555

Dear Mr. Rusche:

The attached Draft-Security Plan is intended to replace our existing,T approved Plan and Amendments thereto.of the existing Plan to the stat i

and approval by a laboratory Security Comittee.

f the ex-nor current planning demand immediate changes in the llo-greater flexibility to meet the increasing activity and changing space a cation / utilization within the Nuclear Energy Laboratory.

Please note that the locations of clar= systan transducers (Figures 11,12, and 13) remain a portion of the Draft Plan, bitt that adoption of th Plan will remove the door-keying information from those figures to a written procedure status.

it is our intent to secure an " Approval in Principic" of the Draft Plan before proceeding with the creation of the Security Committee and the c During this lation of Written Procedures for approval by that committee T

Security Plan.

I The Draft Plan is believed to be in conformity with the requirements of Due to the sensitive nature of the contents of this letter, !

we request that this document be withheld from public disclosure pursuant t 10 CPR Part 73.40.

4

)

Section 2.790 of 10 CFR Part 2.

/,

Siticc$cy, I

I l

hvan Ca on, Director Nuclear Energy Laboratory CEA:NCO:vl Mr. V.N. Rizzolo, Chief, Safeguards Branch, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Co Region V, Suite 202, Walnut Creek Plaza,1990 N. California Blvd.

ec:

Walnut Creek, California, 94596 20, 1976) 1u149 (In accordance with our letter of August

Attechment G

:==

e.

3

//

_==

JUL 11 1977

[..h;;..

C::~~

Docket No. 50-142 t

~

$rr The Regents of.the University. u F==

of California -

~'

' ~~~

ATTN: Mr. Harold V. Brown

=

Environmental Health and Safety Officer

==

Los Angeles, California 90024

,j Gentlemen:

~

"T**::'

I am pleased to respond to the enclosed letter of May 27, 1977 which has been fomarded to me for reply. You fomarded a letter dated

..'.lf".

May 19, 1977-from Ivan Catton, Director, Nuclear Energy Laboratory.

=

We have reviewed Dr. Catton's letter requesting (1) a clarification

-=

of the status of the UCLA Security Plan with regard to the Facility

.T Operating License for the UCLA Training Reactor, and (2) whether the ME Security Plan is conceived as having radiological safety aspects that

'iT interact with the license.

. lit With regard to the status of your Security Plan,10 CFR Part 50,

.e.

Section 50.34 " Contents of Application, Technical Information"

..?

and Section 50.54, " Conditions of Licenses" clearly require you to 5.5 have a security plan and also provide guidance for making changes to G

the plan. Although your Security Plan is not specifically incorporated 1.2E in your license, we consider it to be a part of the license.

In fact.

we.are presently requesting licensees to agree to incorporating the

~==

~

security plan in the license by reference. We have already contacted

..1

~~

your staff on this subject.

==

/._. --With regard to radiological safety aspects of your Security Plan,

~T.

~~

95

/

implementation of the plan provides reasonable assurance that sabotage and the theft or diversion of Special Nuclear Material (SNft) willnnot take place.

Theft of SNM can have radiological implications far in excess of those activities for which your license was issued.

The securi.ty plan, thus, is similar to other safety related components of

.=

your facility in that it provides reasonable assurance that occurrences

~'

which have unacceptable consequences will be prevented.

W

~-~*cMA

.i...

~:.':.

~

Mid=

..=.....;:s = =. :n

..s =

... :.2-} :

==

.. f9f
:: W 4.=i.

Rf= qlll===' ;

.;gi

=.:

.;.:::y.;..

,.=:=-

y.. :..:y :::.::.:.;: _ llk.'.

~

'f*:'

5$k":5_5'55'5 }.5b ,I ~~" ~ "~'.9;;=.. g :.g ..c. F7E.: _,K ~ - ::=

=
.

e f .-----w

a r s

=

The Regents of the University 2-E"" e of California '"! f5 g==: hm== If we can be of further assistance in this matter, please contact us. s:J-]- ~ Sincerely, EN .i. Original sl ned by E EE i

=--

- -~5-George Lear, Chief 3* Operating Reactors Branch #3 2: Division of Operating Reactors gc=.-

Enclosure:

Letter dated May 27, 1977, ~. - - -.. H. Brwn to E. Case

  • = -

FM cc:

== .71.' University of California ATTN: Dr. Ivan Catton, Director EMB Nuclear Energy Laboratory .::M Los Angeles, California 90024 .'.::?.if @5

.lf;'.'

DISTRIBUTION: ' E= Docket

;=2 ORB #3 Rdg NRC PDR

== inueergy 3SI VStello

==' KRGoller JMil1er

}1~T~!

=". GLear DJaffe ~ CParrish .5 Ol&E (3) RClark ACRS (16) TBAbernathy JRBuchanan File

.=.
k 5:

Mi

rzy.
  • SEE PREVIOUS YELLOW FOR CONCURRENCE q).l ORB #3 SB ORB #3 o,,,..,

ou..... >

  • DJaffe: ace
  • RClark Glearb 7/6/77 7/6/77 7/g(.[77
e.,
  • RC FORM 318 (946) MtCM 0240 W w. e. sove n= ment,n,=rine one,ca, sere. ese.ese a

o ' Attechment H j W p, 5 ~ A _s JUN 2 81979 6k s MEMORANDUM FOR: Robert Burnett, Director, Division of Safeguards, NMSS '7 FROM: James R. Miller, Assistant Director for Site and Safeguards, 00R

SUBJECT:

NEW COMMISSION PAPER ON

  • UPGRADE RULE" I understand that you are pro'ceeding on the subject paper on a schedule that would have the paper to the Comission by Monday, July 2,1979 Since some of the Commiss' ion's questions were directed at reactors, I am available to assist you on whatever schedule you desire. My basic interests are:

1) As suggested by Commissioner Kennedy, the following footnote should be added to 573.55: Footnote: In the physical protection of all nuclear reactors, the term "High Assurance" has the same meaning as the tem " Reasonable Assurance" as is used in reactor public health and safety determinations. 2) We suggest'that an urgent meettng be held with ELO to discuss some of the language that you presented to the Commission dealing with "...objec-tive to provide high assurance...." backup during a public hearing. My specific concern is legal 3) As we have discussed, non-power reactors must be deferred from the Upgrade NRR believes the deferral will be for a period of about 2 - 3 yea of the indepth studies we will be conducting. 4 During this period, we will rely on 173.60 for those facilities with greater than formula quantities of SSNM and 5173.40 and 73.47 for all othe.'s. This will maintain the status i quo and closely parallels the coments of Chairman Hendrie. Also NRR will continue studying the need for a separate rule 'for non-power reactor facilities and comence preparing such a rule should it be determined { necessary.

4) AstoanyinvestigationintotheSurryincident,itmustbefullycoord-nated with NRR and I&E. We will provide any assistance necessary in this I

matter an;l a joint meeting laying out the plan of attack should be held prior to any efforts expended. / 5 James R. illier, Assistant Director for Site and Safeguards Division of Operating Reactors acsp2 w. .~.c.> .............. ~.. ~.. ~ ~. - ~ ~ ~ " - ~ ~"" """ "" ~ " " " " ~ " " " """""".I"""" i .. ~.... - - - ~ ~. ~ ~ - " " " " " " - ""?"" ' i unk ........ ~.. " " " " j m e pomu ne o. m xm on oree

  • = * - " " " ' " ' " " " " * ' " ' " " ~ " " " '

~

....n .s- ~ i w O v% w .2 kr Robert Burnett JUN 2 81973 i ec: E. Howard. I&E R. Purple, SD F. Pagano

5. Ramos DISTRIBUTION:

Central Files NRR Reading (P-428) S&S Reading J. tillier l l. ... 5 R....-.D..O..R.... ...A ShS/ DOR S&S/ .n... e amos .JIt .....V.... s -..a=.> ..............C............. '........ ....................i .... 6../. 2.. 7.../.7 9...... .. 6.......... 79

v. *

, mcroam ne o.uir w

    • /

A UNITED STATES f (, 3 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t WASHINGTON, D. C. 20565 w q g *s. AUG 9 1979 Mr. Don Alger University of Missouri Columbia, Missouri 65201

Dear Mr. Alger:

SUBJECT:

SAMPLE PHYSICAL SECURITY PLAN FOR HON-POWER NUCLEAR REACTOR FACILITIES POSSESSING SPECIAL NUCLEAR MATERIAL CF MODERATE STRATEGIC SIGNIFICANCE The Comission has amended its regulations to require physical protection measures at non-power reactors, to detect theft of special nuclear material of moderat4 and low str.ategic significance. This new regulation ( 73.47) is designed to provide a level of protection equivalent to the.reconnendations of Information Circular 225 Rev.1 published by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Concurrently, the Commission published a regulatory guide entitled, " Standard Format and Content for the Licensee Physical Security Plan for the Protection of Special Nuclear Material of Moderate or Low Strategic Significance." Applicable non-power reactor licensees must meet these requirements for detectih j of theft in addition to previous regulatory requirements for protection against sabotage. As a result of discussions with the non-power reactor licensees, we havedraftedtheattachedSamplePlanasanaidtouniformityandcompletenessin) the preparation of physical security plans. ~ v I would appreciate your coments on the proposed Sample Plan by September 15, 1979. Sincerel ,_.4 W-jjl D Fran ' (Aagado Chief Reac' tor Saleg'uar,ds Development Branch Division of Operating Reactors

Enclosure:

Propose'd Sample Plan e. l ___--___-_-_-__A

Attachment J CONTAINS 10 CFR 2.790(d) INFORMATION

  • l,..

a WITHHELD FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE Sample Physical Security Plan for Non-Power Nuclear Reactor Facilities Possessing Special Nuclear Material of Moderate Strategic Significance 9 Reactor Safeguards Development Branch Division of Operating Reactors Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission v + l l l l l l t l Revision 1 l June 14, 1979 l

CONTAINS 10 CFR 2.790(d) INFORMATION

  • l WITHHELD FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE Table of Contents Pagg Purpose General Performance Objectives Identification of Special Nuclear Material on Site Implementation General Site Layout Security Areas

' Controlled Access Areas (Use) Controlled Access Areas (Storage) Vital Areas N Detection Devices or Procedures Surveillance of Vital Areas. Preauthorization Screening Badging System Lock System Access Control Description Escori. System \\ earch Description S Administrative and Security Organization Communication Response Procedures Material Transportation Requirements Receiver Requirements Export and Import Requirements Revision 1 June 14, 1979

C' CONTAINS 10 CFR 2.790(d) INFORMATION WITHHELD FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE Purpose 'This security plan describes the physic'al protection system and security organization which will provide protection against radiological sabotage and detect the theft of special nuclear material at the Sample Facility. It demonstrates compliance with 10 CFR 50.34(c), 10 CFR'73.40 and 10 CFR 73.47. Revision 1 June 14, 1979 a

7 a s At trchment K . l. UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMYISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 2 css 5 Cecember 19, 1979 SECY-79-187C INFORMATION REPORT gcyp For: The Commissioners d4N 7 19 % a From: William J. Dircks, Director k Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards k g Thru: Executive Director for Operations 8 p L A L g Suoiect: IMPACT OF THE SAFEGUARDS UPGRADE RULE ON NONPOWER h2 ACTOR LICENSEES Purocse: To provide th~e Ccmmissioners with the following information: a status report on the impact of the Safeguards Upgrade Rule on the 22 nonpower reactor (NPR) licensees listed in SECY 79-187B; review of safeguards measures in force at NPRs; the status of the reevaluation of the 100 rem /hr at 3. feet self protection exemption criterion; and the status of NRC staff reviews and studies which might lead to giving safeguarcs credit for enrich-ment, type and form of the SSNM located at NPRs. Discussion: Backorcund On July 24, 1979, the Commission helc an open meeting on the impact of the Safeguards Upgrade Rule on nonpower reactor licensees (SECY 79-1878). The discussion concerned the staff recommendation that nonpowet reactor licensees be defarred from implementing the requirements of the Safeguards Upgrade Rule and that in the interim the new Category II (573.67) physical protection requirements as well as the current (973.60) require-ments be applied to nonpower reactor licensees with greater than formula quantities of SSNM. During the meeting the Ccmmissioners asked questions concerning the numoer of Category I nonpower reactors that would oe subject to the physical protection recuirements of the Safeguards Upgrade Rule as well as what physical protection is presently in place at those nonpower reactors. The Commissic,ners were also concerned with what physical protecticn requirements were actually needed at Category I nonpower reactor facilities given the unique type form and enric N,ent level of the reactor fuel. This concerr, was expressco in relation to the amount of time nonpower reactors shculd be deferred from imolementing the recairements of the Safecuards Uccrade Rule. The Cccmission asked the staff for an in.erim status reocrt in 120 days whicn would give a more cefinitive exolanation of the Category I nc power reactor prcolem and actions being taken tc cetermine the appropriate pnysical protect on re':uirenents for these f acilities. This i Cc, mission pacer is the interim status report. Oca:ac.: C. "', Nulsen

-7:131

T. D (.- 4 Additionally eleven NPR licensees indicated that they could be exempted from the Upgrade Rule requirements based solely on the 100 rem /hr at 3 feet exemption as discussed earlier. However the licensees cited a variety of problems that they may encoun,ter. enumerates these problems and includes a table that has been developed to give a quick breakdewn by licensee on the ease with which each one can maintain its fuel at the 100 rem / radiation level. Again it should be noted that some may not meet the radiation levels during short periods of time. One course of action that the staff is investigating is the idea of requiring increased physical protection, on an interim basis, for the NPR SNM during the periods it is not self, protecting. Current NPR Safeauards Measures in Force Since late 1973 NPR licensees have been required to submit a l physical security plan as part of their application for a license to operate. NPR licensees wno oossessed less than a formula quantity of SSNM were sucject to the provisions of 550.34(c) and 973.40 anc those who possessed more than a formula quantity of SSNM were subject to the provisions of 973.50 and 973.60, as applicable, in addition to 550.34(c) and 573.40. In 1974, the staff developed guidance in supoort of the foregoing requirements to aid applicants and licensees in the development of security plans to protect reactors against acts of sabotage. The guidance was contained in 3 documents and was sent to aporopriate licensees. The guidance occucents addressed'sec-urity systems that were applicable to NPRs of three different power levels: >5000 kw. (1) <250* kw, (2) >250 kw, but <5000 kw and (3) All of the currently aporoved security plans for the reacters in cuestion were reviewed and analy:ad with respect to prevent-ing sabotage and a few were evaluated by NRR to determine the adequacy of their physical protection system to protect against the theft or diversion of SNM. All NPRs have been inspected against their security olans for comoliance during the period 1975-1979. While some items of noncccoliance have been noted, there was no adverse effect en public nealth and safety. In addition, staff members of NRR have visited and assessed 50 NPRs in the past two years. All 22 NPRs wnich SECY 79-1875 listed as Category I facilities, based on autneri:ed possession limits, have security systems in place and have teen inscected and fcund in concliance with their security plans -nich are based on present re:uirements under !50.3 (c), s73.40, 573.50 and 973.60, as applicabie The security systems at all 22 NPRs have ::een examined during visits ty-staff memoers of NER. i / 'ints is tne Category limit for TRIGA reactors, the training rea tor limit was > cr <100 kw.

~ Attachment L [ t { Nuclear foes: Temxists f V-Ftf may attack UCLA reactor UCLA's nuclear reactor could be the target of aLOS ANG possible terrorist attack during the 1984 Olymples, and have asked the federal government to shut it down { before the Summer Games. f security plan for the 23 year-old research re 'Ihc Committee to Bridge the Gap said in papers filed with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that the 1 , des to protect against sabotage. j" maintained that reseArch reacttook the same position in separate paper s l federal regulation to have sabotageors are not required by '~ 1he NRC Atomic Safety and tection. -l scheduled to examine the security question when ng Board is relicensing hearing continue next month. ( Reactor enough time ents said this means there will not im the board decides such an action is needed; remove the fuel before the Olympic \\ i I [ - _ _}}