ML20002B653
| ML20002B653 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/22/1980 |
| From: | James Shea NRC OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS (OIP) |
| To: | Dircks W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8012220396 | |
| Download: ML20002B653 (2) | |
Text
l 4
cc; 2 ; 1530 MEMORANDUM FOR: William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations FROM:
James R. Shea, Director Office of International Programs
SUBJECT:
SECY-80-428, PROPOSED INFORMATION EXCHANGE ARRANGEMENT WITH MEXICO In approving the subject arrangement Comissioner Gilinsky noted that it is a "very one-sided arrangement." On October 8, you asked me if it is one-sided in our view. As further detailed below, I agree that, in terms of volume of infomation to be provided for the foreseeable future, this arrangement is one-sided; however, this is not very different from our arrangements with several other developing countries, and really serves at this point as part of our safety assistance to countries with new nuclear programs and as an investment toward the day when the flow of useful infomation could become more reciprocal as the country's nuclear program and experience grow.
More specifically, the fact that NRC will give some countries much more information and technical assistance than we receive from them has been acknowledged from the beginning of our arrangement program. Mexico falls into this category, along with Korea, Brazil, Greece, Spain, Israel, Taiwan, the Philippines, Finland, and Denmark, all of which have concluded agreements with NRC. What we have required of these countries is that they reciprocate to the extent they can, providing us with copies of what they do produce.
This realistic "one-sidedness" was discussed very recently in SECY-80-355, which drew no adverse Commission coment.
It should be noted that "one-sided" is a relative tem--it does not mean that we get no infomation from these countries. For example, we regularly obtain operating experience infomation on Spanish, Korean, Taiwn, and Finnish power reactors, as well as other useful infomation.
The primary difference between the Mexican arrangement and the others (aside from the letter-implementing procedures format in which it is being handled) is that the i.etter of Agreement specifically limits the exchange to infomation on reactors of U.S. origin. As SECY-80-428 pointed out, however, Mexico has no other type of reactor either operating, being built, or on order; therefore, this is a moot point for the five-year tem of this arrangement.
In addition, SECY-80-428 indicated that the implementing procedures will contain language such as the sentence in current Section I.l.e., which follows, so that NRC
,, '/
will not be denied any safety-significant infonnation:
s-0/u~ '
/
"Also, although neither party comits to full disclosure of all f
infomation pertaining to reactors of non-U.S. origin, each party undertakes to advise the other of any known problems which might g /.
/
affect the safety of U.S. or Mexican reactors, regardless of the d'
5OU R E OT TM5 I nT OT34 T. l O R.
i j
O F FICE h..........
SURNAME........
i OATE.
NRC FORM 318 (9-76) NRCM 0240 DU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1979 289-369
1 2
OCT 2 21520 William J. Dircks As a result of the above I believe the Nxican arrangement is roughly comparable in reciprocity to those with the other developing countries.
Orf tinal signed by hmes R. Shes James R. Shea, Director Office of International Programs bcc: JRShea JDLafleur DMChenier General Arrangement File 1
l
(
i OFnCE>. )
.h/
l
. DMCh.enie r: kf JDL fleur,,i;.
- JRSHg, suRNaue
- DATEk, 1 /21/8,0, 10/y,/80,j, 10/2.[/80 NRC FORM 318 (9-16) NRCM 0240 C U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1979-289-369
- - -. ~ - - - - - -,
_,.., _,