ML19273B976
| ML19273B976 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/30/1979 |
| From: | James Shea NRC OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS (OIP) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19273B977 | List: |
| References | |
| SECY-79-310, NUDOCS 7906180615 | |
| Download: ML19273B976 (4) | |
Text
. _ _ _ _.
A ril 30, 1979 SECY-79-310 p
(
COMMISSIONER ACTION For:
The Comissioners From:
James R. Shea, Director Office of International Programs Thru:
Executive Directer for Operation
Subject:
PROPOSED LICENSE AMENDMENT TO EXP T SOURCE MATERIAL TO CANADA, XUO8342, SECY-79-202 (FORMERLY SUE-8342)
Purpose:
Comission review of proposed issuance of subject license amendment to RMl Company.
Review Dates:
60-day period expires on May 14, 1979 120-day period expires on July 13, 1979 Discussion:
On December 10, 1976, license number SUE-8342 was issued to RM1 Company authorizing the export of 99,250 pounds (45,020 kgs) of depleted uranium metal to Canada (refer:
<(
On July 7, 1978 RM1 requested an amendment to (1) extend the expiration date for two years and (2) increase the quantity authorized for export to 297,750 pounds (135,059 kgs) of depleted uranium (an increase of 198,500 pounds or 90,039 kilograms.)
SUE-8342, Amendment No. I was issued by the staff on October 16, 1978 to extend the expiration date to October 1, 1980.
The material, in the form of solid scrap, is being returned to Canada as remelt feed for casting into ingots and recycle. The material will be processed ultimately as anti-tank ammunition for the US Air Force weapons system program.
The applicant advises that the program appears to be on-going with requirements into the 1980's. The additional
Contact:
J. Dunn Lee (492-7984)
G. G. Oplinger (492-7866) 7906180615 2353 208 e
2
2-p jantity to be shipped reflects the total amount expected over the duration of the program as now scheduled.
Depleted uranium for a non-nuclear end-use is not subject to the export licensing criteria in Section 127 of the Act and 10 CFR 110.42. Eurther, such materials fall within the categories of materials listed in 10 CFR 110.41(d) which are not normally reviewed by.the Executive Branch; however..the subject application.was inadvertently sent to the Executive Branch for review and coment on July 24, 1978.
In response to our request.for views, the Executive Branch has (1) concluded that issuance of the license would.not be inimical'to the. interests of the United States, including the comon defense and security; (2) confirmed that the proposed export.may be made without.being subject to an Agreement for Cooperation since source material may be licensed under Section 64 of the Atomic Energy Act without the prerequisite of a.Section.123-Agreement; and (3) advised that there were no material changed circumstances since submission of its detalleo analysis of DecemDer 18, 1978 on application XSNM-1339 (SECY-78-688A).
.A The staff has also concluded that there are no material changed circumstances concerning exports to Canada which would affect the Comission!s consideration of licensing criteria and.which have. occurred.since export license XSNM-1339 was issued on February 26, 1979.
Upon review of the Executive Branch analysis and the suoportive documentation, the staff has independently concluded that the requirements of the Atomic Energy Act and the NNPA of 1978 have been met and that the proposed licenv. would not be inimical to the comon defense and security of the U.S. or constitute an unreasonable risk to the public health and safety.
The following documents are forwarded for Comission review of the subject application: (1) License SUE-8342 and Amendment No. 1 (Appendix A); (2) letter of July 7, 1978 requesting amendment (Appendix B); (3) Executive Branch views of March 14, 1979 (Appendix C); and (4) copy of proposed license (Appendix D).
2353 209 wem-
=mw-Aw i m a-ehe e---
-.ms._
p NMSS Technical Although depleted uranium.is subject to IAEA safeguards, Review:
this export may be terminated from IAEA coverage because of its non-nuclear end use. NMSS has received no infor-mation on whether this will occur.
NMSS has informed IP of its specific safeguards information needs, and IP has been following up with the Department of State and other agencies as appropriate to obtain information on these matters.
In addition, on February 28, 1979, the Chairman wrote to Mr. Rickering of the Department of State regarding NRC's.information needs in the areas of state systems of accounting and control and IAEA safeguards implementation and problems, including.as an enclosure a specific statement of these needs prepared by NMSS.
No inforin!. ion has been received concerning the state systems of accounting and control in Canada. Consequently, NMSS is unable to make any determination regarding the capaoilities of its. system to support the effective application of IAEA safeguards.
NMSS has received no information concerning IAEA implementa-( ',
tion activities and problems in Canada other than from the source which.was the basis for NMSS conclusions in Table III of the memorandum to. Commissioner Gilinsky dated November 29, 1978.. A classif.ied appendix which provices a description of the basis for Table III and the relationship of the proposed export will be forwarded separately. Although the available information on IAEA implementation is.not sufficient to permit NMSS to completely evaluate the ef.fectiveness of IAEA safeguards in Canada, NMSS. notes that the safeguards significance of the identified problems is relatively small with respect to this export because only depleted uranium is involved Physical security criteria contained in 10 CFR Parts 110.42 and 110.43 are not applicable to this export.
2353 210
4 i
OIP Coment:
As pointed out on page 2, paragraphs 1 and 2, this material is intended for a non-nuclear end-use and can be exported without being subject to an Agreement for Cooperation.
Furthermore, IAEA safeguards are not applicable to such material when used in non-nuclear activities (see INFCIRC/153, paragraphs 1 and 34(a)).
Under these circumstances, the transfer of the niaterial to Canada would not be the subject of a joint notifi-cation to the International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna.
Consequently, it would not be listed in the Agency's inventory of material under safeguards in Canada.
The question of termination of safeguards in this case is therefore not relevant.
Recommendation:
That the proposed license amendment be issued to RMI Company.
Coordination:
0 ELD has no legal objection.
NMSS views on the adequacy of the accounting and control system and the effectiveness of IAEA safeguards implementation in Canada are as stated above.
()
Ja s R. Shea, Director 0/iceofInternationalPrograms
Enclosures:
As stated DISTRIBUTION:
Comissioners Comission Staff Offices Executive Director for Operations Secretariat NOTE:
Comissioner comer.ts should be provided directly to the Office of the Secretary, by 'c.o.b.
Wednesday. May 9.1979 Comission staff office comments, if any, should be submitted to the Comissioners NLT uav 7. 1979
_._, with an information copy to the Office of the Secretary.
If the paper is of such a nature that it requires additional time for analytical review and comment, the Comissinners and the Secretariat should be apprised of when comments may be expected.
2353 211
-