Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
1515897
label
Nuclear Policy Statement Meeting, September 23, 1976
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
1515897
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Nuclear Policy Statement Meeting, September 23, 1976
citationUrl
collections
James M. Cannon Files (Ford Administration)
James Cannon's Issues Files
subjects
Legislation
Nuclear energy
Uranium enrichment
iiifBase
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
1515897
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1976-09-30
month
9
year
1976
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1976-09-01
month
9
year
1976
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
url
mediaId
f1f39894512cd93b
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 25, folder "Nuclear Policy Statement Meeting,
September 23, 1976" of the James M. Cannon Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential
Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald Ford donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Digitized from Box 25 of the James M. Cannon Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
MEETING ON NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION
Thursday, Sept. 23, 1976
8:30 a.m.
accomplished verbally -
stni to be contler down
to
156 Thouty- - Auspitable
NFAA - Poun
w Drawty
is dropping
engrage - look
for us &
let -
NO Comm twell
-
his
Neveley
GERALD LIBRARY ? FORD
DEVELOPME
UNITED STATES
STATES WESEA HOMELA STATE ADMINISTR
ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20545
USA
September 22, 1976
976 SEP 22 PM 12 57
MEMORANDUM TO:
BRENT SCOWCROFT
JIM CANNON
JIM LYNN
JIM CONNOR
CHARLES ROBINSON
FROM:
BOB FRIED this
SUBJECT:
2:00 Meeting
Attached are some notes on the current state of play on our
non-proliferation/NFAA negotiations, as background for our meeting.
CC: Jim Mitchell
Glenn Schleede
Dave Elliott
we agreed to a tuger
of top p we want
even
P come fund
FORD 3 LIBRARY 076870
couple 4 yrs
Here: now for D 'we
Cenner
\
P ourside of NRC
AMERICAN REVOLUTION WENTENNING
1776-1976
®
we of with control of
accept The coupt
water But -
P overations
NO
Concement realution
AUGST
BOB
vsig
30
H St to have somether
100
Symmyton ACT Ayro tue
arrial off dul V u aid
NDC arts
P can overadi
case un
calender days by it Vlexolutive
30 to exam x pars it
volutiving to owner
He can veto
N3 th overate veto
NonProliferation/NFAA
Issue
NFAA
Key persons will not remove holds. Alternative legislation
(attached) proposed to:
1. Authorize Portsmouth
2. Require study of public VS. private
Some accommodation is possible, but might have to include
Congressional review prior to submitting contracts.
The problem seems to be that those opposed to NFAA do not want
to pass a bill that prejudges commitment to private sector.
NonProliferation
There are seven key issues, which are the issues raised in the
letter to the President of last Friday. Agreement on principle is
good in all cases, but language problems remain on five issues.
Of these, two appear easy to handle, and three are difficult to resolve
(potentially unsolvable.) An explanatory table is attached.
Senate, House, ERDA, and State staff are now meeting to:
1. Agree on language where possible.
2. Formulate alternative language where agreement is not
possible.
Suggested arrangement is:
1. Agreement on clean bill is reached by all parties, or
nothing goes forward.
2. House, Senate, and Administration agree on legislative
process before agreed bill is released. Objective
would be to:
a. Pass identical bill in both houses.
b. Give the JCAE major credit.
LIDRARY
FORD
Key Issues
Senate Bill
House Bill
070830
Possible Compromise
1.
Trigger of stricter
President defers
Criteria become
Strong statement of
"Phase Two" criteria
application of
effective when all agree
Congressional intent
criteria year by year
plus requirement that
President submit legisla-
tion to tighten criteria
every year. (This is
wh
Hur
the most difficult
issue)
Reprocessing
Does not clearly
Would allow
Principle of House
criteria
allow reprocessing
reprocessing in
bill seems acceptable.
in "acceptable"
"accepable"
Language is very
countries)
countries
difficult to write.
3.
Presidential
Requires President
President can
House override provision
override of NRC
to change export
override NRC
plus 60-day delay
licensing criteria
during which Congress
on a case-by-case
can pass joint
basis
resolution to override
President
4.
Government to
This is a minor technical problem blown out
government trans-
of proportion and now resolved in our favor
fers
5.
Nuclear Prolifera-
Required on
Not required
Require only for new
tion Assessment
virtually
Agreements for Coopera-
Statement
everything
tion, and then separate
from President's
approval of Agreement
(This appears settled)
Key Issues
Senate Bill
House Bill
Possible Compromise
6.
Components and
Allows NRC to
Limits NRC to
Broadens NRC control
substances
license selected
components; no
to selected components
component or sub-
veto over Commerce
or substances; no
stance and veto any
veto. (This appears
export by Commerce
settled)
7.
Reports to
Requires President to
No such requirement
No requirement;
Congress
identify Agreements
however, President
to be renegotiated
reports back on
nonproliferation
status of other
countries, (possibly
in classified form.)
(This is nearly
settled)
AMENDMENT TO S. 3770--NUCLEAR FUEL ASSURANCE STUDY/PORTSMOUTH ADD-ON
Explanation: This amendment adds a new section to S. 3770, including
the $255 million Portsmouth authorization contained in S. 2035 and
requiring a Presidential report comparing private vs. Government
enrichment options.
Section
-
(a) The Administrator of Energy Research and Development
is hereby authorized and directed to initiate construction planning
and design, construction, and operation activities for expansion
of an existing uranium enrichment facility at the earliest possible
date. There is hereby authorized to be appropriated $255,000,000
for this purpose. Nothing in this Act shall delay the implementation
of this subsection.
(b) The President is directed to submit a report to Congress no
later than April 15, 1977 including
(1) a comparative analysis of the advantages and disadvantages
of meeting future uranium enrichment requirements through--
(a) entering into cooperative arrangements to encourage
the development of a competitive private uranium enrichment
industry,
(b) further expanding Government uranium enrichment capacity,
or
(c) a combination of the above.
This analysis shall give particular emphasis to the impact of each
of these alternatives on the worldwide proliferation of nuclear
explosive devices and efforts to control the spread of sensitive
nuclear technology;
(2) a detailed discussion of the safeguards against diversion
of materials and technology, including physical security, to be
maintained at Government and any proposed private uranium
enrichment facilities under the jurisdiction of the United States;
and
(3) projections as to the supply of and demand for enriched
uranium in domestic and foreign markets through the year 1990
and an assessment of U,S. and foreign natural uranium reserves.