ML19249D359

Responds to to President Re TMI-2 Accident. Several Groups Are Investigating TMI-2 Accident & Nuclear Power.Assures That NRC Will Take Necessary Actions to Ensure Public Safety

ML19249D359
Person / Time
Site:	Crane
Issue date:	08/02/1979
From:	Hendrie J NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:	Hipolito Gonzalez HOUSE OF REP.
References
NUDOCS 7909240355
Download: ML19249D359 (9)

Text

.

UNITED STATES

!Y NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION bF WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 g((

g

\\; Q /

August 2, 1979 CHAIRMAN The Honorable Henry B. Gonzalez United States House of Representatives Washington, D. C.

20515

Dear Congressman Gonzalez:

Your letter to President Carter expressing concern about nuclear power in light of the Three Mile Island Unit 2 (TMI-2) accident has been referred to me.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to respond' to your concerns.

As you are aware, several groups are in the process of investigating the Three Mile Island accident as well as its implications on nuclear power and the regulatory process. These groups, including the President's Connission, Congressional Committees, the GAO, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and the nuclear industry, will be providing critical assessments from a varie.ty of viewpoints.

As a result of the TMI-2 accident, the NRC has already taken a number of actions to improve conditions at operating plants regarding the specific items mentioned in your letter. For example, the operators of all plants designed by Babcock and Wilcox (B&W) similar to TMI-2 have received addi-tional training to assure that they understand and can manipulate the controls properly in the event of an incident such as that which occurred at TMI-2.

Imediately following the TMI-2 accident, Bulletins and Orders were issued to all pressur1 zed water reactor facilities requiring certain specific actions and precautions be taken to avoid safety related problems identified at TMI-2.

The investigations referred to aeove will include a hard look at a broad spectrum of operator-related issues including training, staffing, the adequacy of information available to operators, operating procedures, and various aspects of human engineering. The objective of these reviews will be to make the operator more effective in mitigating accidents.

I should also emphasize that, although the B&W reactors have been our primary concern, we have taken actions to assure that the " lessons learned" from the TMI-2 accident are applied to Westinghouse and Combustion Engineering reactors as well.

With regard to emergency preparedness, a renewed examination of the emergency response capability of licensees and local, State and Federal officials is being undertaken. The Comission has recently established a Task Force on Emergency Planning which is to formulate the scope, direction and pace of the NRC's overall emergency planning activities, and to report to the Commis-sion next month.

In addition, an Advance Notice of Expedited Rulemaking g QSO 7909240 [

The Henry B. Gonzalez relating to emergency planning in the vicinity of nuclear facilities has been published.

(Enclosure 1) The NRC has also recently completed the installation of direct and dedicated telephone lines between operating plants, the NRC Response Center and the NRC Regional Offices. This system is currently being tested.

In addition to the improvements to off-site response capability, increased priority will be given to the licensee's post-accident monitoring equipment. Such equipment will be upgraded where necessary to improve the ability of licensees to determine the magnitude of an accidental release and to inform others of its There are many more areas where improvements will be considered. A task force of our Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation is analyzing the TMI-2 accident to determine what' additional regulatory requirements and guidance may be needed to assure that the " lessons learned" from the accident are promptly applied to all nuclear power facilities. Requirements for design chacges and operational improvements beyond those already being implemented are likely to result.

These requirements will be reflected in new or revised NRC regulations, changes in review and inspection practices and procedures, new or revised industry standards, and improved and more explicit regulatory guidance.

As your letter suggests, the NRC is undertaking an extensive immediate review of all operating PWRs to assure that specific minimum design and operational measures identified as a result of the TMI-2 accident are being implemented.

In the course of considering the need for such measures, all B&W designed plants were shut down or remained shut down unti' a'l such measures could be implemented.

In addition, the licensees of bc"., sater reactors (BWR) have been asked to review the TMI-2 events and determine the implications, if any, for their plants.

As these reviews continue it is likely that the need for additional measures will be identified for implementation in.the short term on operating plants.

In the long tenn, the many investigations will likely result in the need for further changes to improve or enhance the safety of operating plants.

The TMI-2 accident also has significant implications for plants in various stages of the licensing process. These include plants currently under NRC staff review for Construction Permits or Operating Licenses and plants under construction (in.the post-Construction Permit stage between the Construction Permit and Operating License reviews). The proposed design and operation of all such plants will be reviewed by the NRC staff in light of the lessons learned from the TMI-2 accident. The result of such reviews will likely be facility design modifications and changes to operation and emergency procedures for most plants.

1002 051

fD D

ooE L

D) l 3 l @ q The Honorable Henry B. Gonzalez o AJ d J

The timing of these reviews for individual plants will depend on many factors including the status of plant construction; the status of staff review of the application; the status of and requirements for licensing hearings and review by the NRC's Advisory Comittee on Reactor Safeguards; the specific licensing requirements that are developed from the many post-TMI-2 investi-gations and studies and the timing of such investigations and studies.

The NRC staff's highest priorities at this time are to continue those necessary activities at the Three Mile Island site and to assure t: hat specific immediate remedial actions are implemented at operating plants as discussed above.

With regard to licensing reviews, the NRC staff is initially focusing its efforts on plants that are in the final stages of operating license review.

At a minimum, these plants will be reviewed in the same snanner as plants already operating with regard to needed remedial actions. As the TMI-2 studies and investigations proceed, it is likely that additional actions that must be implemented in the short term prior to issuan e of an operating license will be identified. The staff will complete the necessary reviews and report its findings related to whether such short-term actions must also be implemented prior to a decision to issue an operating license for each plant. Although no formal moratorium has been declared, it is anticipated that it will take at least three months for such reviews to be completed and for the necessary pre-licensing charges to be implemented.

These studies and investigations will likely also identify actions that should be implemented in the longer term after Operating 1.icense issuance.

The necessary actions, if clearly identified at the time, can be included as license conditions requiring action at various stages of operation, e.g.,

actions required prior to fuel loading; actions required prior to criticality; actions required prior to power operation; actions required by the first refueling; etc.

With regard to Construction Permits, a similar process will be utilized.

Those staff reviews necessary before Construction Permit issuance will be conducted for each application. Additional reviews will likely be necessary in the post-Construction Pemit stage or as part of the NRC staff's Operating License review.

Such reviews can be left to the Operatirs License stage only if the required (by regulation) Construction Permit findings can be made and it is reasonable to do so, i.e., if waiting until the Operating License stage will not foreclose implementing design modifications necessary to assure safe operation of the facility.

g002 052

]

[d a& S D

The Honorable Henry B. Gonzalez I With regard to the resolution of other safety questions referred to in your letter, the NRC reports to Congress in accordance with Section 210 of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended, on its plans to resolve

" Unresolved Safety Issues." The report, " Identification of Unresolved Safety Issues Relating to Nuclear Power Plants" (NUREG-0510, Nov.1978),

describes the issues being examined to detemine whether our requirements should b2 modified for new and operating plants (Enclosure 2). A copy is enclosed. An unresolved safety issue is considered on a generic basis only after the staff has made an initial evaluation for indiviN1 plants and determined that the safety significance of the issue does not prohibit continued operation or require licensing actions while the longer term generic rr. view is underway. The most recent report on the unresolved safety issues is included in Chapter 2 of the 1978 NRC Annual Report (Enclosure 3).

The report defines an " Unresolved Safety Issue", identifies and discusses each issue and discusses tne NRC staff's plans for and status of resolution of each.

The "l:nresolved Siety Issues" Program has been impacted to some extent by the diversion of manpower to work on Three Mile Island related issues.

Hov, eyer, sceps are being taken at this time to reallocate the necessary rt. sources to revitalize the " Unresolved Safety Issues" Program with the objective of restoring the schedules to those reported in the 1978 NRC Annual Report.

In addition, quite clearly, additional technical issues that qualify as " Unresolved Safety Issues" will be identified in the months ahead. These issues will be identit;ed and discussed in the 1979 Annual Report.

To ensure that waste management is given increased attention, earlier this year we created a Division of Waste Management within our Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. We are placing a great deal of emphasis on organizing, consolidating, and staffing this new division so that we can be fully responsive to concerns such as those you have raised in the waste management area.

I fully agree that this is a serious moment for nuclear power in the Unites States. As I remarked to the Congress in testimony shortly after the accident, it is my view, as I am sure it is yours, that we cannot have an acceptable nuclear power program in this country if there is any appreciable risk of events of the Three Mile Island kind occurring at nuclear power plants.

I am confident that the necessary changes to plant design and operations and licensing requirements and fractices can be identified and implemen; d as necessary to maintain that risk at an acceptably low level.

1002 09

The Honorable Henry B. Gonzalez In your letter to President Carter you reconnend that the Cmunission should have a policy of shutting down nuclaar power plants when there are questions concerning safety.

Let me assure you that the Commission's policy is to order whatever action may be necessary, including shutdown, to protect public health and safety. Our actions earlier this year in shutting down five plants because of seismic design deficiencies and our more recent actions with respect to the B&W plants clearly indicate our connitment to protect 1ng public health and safety.

Carlton Karrnerer of our Office of Congressional Affairs has acknowledged the receipt of your letters to me of April 3,1979 and April 5,1979.

My :.mnents above discuss some of the information requested in those letters. Hy staff is working to respond to all of the infomation requests received over the past several months as expeditiously as possible.

Specific responses to your letters of April 3 and 5 will be provi %d Ihortly.

Sincerely, G

u&

c

'. Joseph M. Hendrie Enclosures :

1.

Federal Register notice (44FR 4183)

" Adequacy c.,d Acceptance of Emergency Planning Around Nuclear Facilities" 2.

NUREG-0510 3.

1978 NRC Annual Report 1002 09

..w -

~

reders! Register / Vol. 44.'No.138 / Tuesday July 17. 1979 / Proposed RulesT.m 41433 installation infonnation shs3 be '

for continued operation of a nuclear' in Sdppora oflight Water Noclear,..., -

submitted as soon as possible and the facility, end coordbation between the Power Pfarzts." NUPhe =/EP'L 5:0/.

applicant shall permit veriScation by the licensee plan and State and local plans.

1-78-015. December tsca.See 43 Fed.,

The emmiasion seeks written.

• Reg. wu (December 1.=. In78). see also.

r Intemational AtrnnicEnergy Agency -

and take such other action as may be - comments on what items should be 44 Fed. Reg. 23137 (Aptfl18.1279). -

~

Furthermoes, a number.af arsanizations. '

necessaiy to implement the US/1AEA induded in the rule.

Safeguards Agreement. in the mannn

DITus

Comments aridue'no la'ttl hn including Critical h and Public e -..

Interest Ramsearch Groups have g_.

m, set forth in iI 75.8,75.11-75.14 ofthis '* August 31.1979.

~^

and supplannented a pan-for y'

chapter.The commission will grant an

~ rul mau=> pmvl ualy d==sa by the ~,

exemption from this zw-st, upon -

tha issu application. if it clstarmines that the semined'to de W of 66 ' Commi== a. en=amng the operaticLal..,, _.,,

r details of evacuadan M=== - See 44 y~.

installation wfIl not be indaded on the ap UMuctaar

-- w-hmston.

0555..... FR 32486 Gune 6.1979)., g y,,,1:,,..,

United States aligible list.

m c__

_=. 3a. a_,ama to 7

Part 170-Fees for Fac5tues and Post PUBITHER esPORataTION COffrAcTt.

Initiate amma.hd gnlemalring 'a,% r.

Patrida A. Comena. Site Designation Materials Ucenses and Other... r procedursen the sab ect af Stata nd: m l

Regulatory Serv 6ces Under the Atomic. Branch. OfHee of Standards : -

. local em r== pan== plans and Energy Act of 1954,as Amended Development. Nuclear Regulatory'

- those of hwnsees.The Comunsalon is

~

Commission. Washington DC:0555 soliciting prublic=====+= in this area.

12. Section 170.11is amended by 3"

adding a new paragraph (a)(10) to re'ad partirnimq co dieinHowmg issues:

as follows:

sesamran sa9RaAAme ne NRC

1. What.should be the basac objectives requires that power reactor license of emergerney planadngt f 170.11 Exempoons.

applicants plan for rsdialogical a.To recince public radiation (a) No application fees, licensee fees, emergencies within their plant sites and exposuruY' renewal fees. or inspection fees shall be make arrangemests with State and local-q%g b.To prwvent public radiation required for.

organizations to respond to accidents that might have consequences be and c.Thblos e vacuaW pnMic?

(10) Activities of the Commission d"(( has bee the nuclear licensmg process.See 10 objechu quanuSea To whac extent M 4===

slat to undertaken pursuant to Part 75 of this 2.

halconsututes an eBactne chapter, solely for the purpose of CFR Part 50. Appendix E (1979). see also implementation of the US/IAEA additional guidance in U.S. NRC, emerge =cyresponse plan fw State and Safeguards Agreement.

Regulatory Guide 1.101. " Emergency local ager.=ies? Far li-7 What are planning for Nuclear Power plants -

the essen al elements that ansat be" -

Dated at Washington. DC this 12th day of (Rev.1.1977).

induded = U2 effective plan? Do N"

To aid State and local govermoents in existing NFIC swa~ cts for limn =ees For the Nuclear Regulatory r'-= ion, the development and implementation of (10 CFR Part 50. AppendixE) and t-:wi l. CMk.

adequate emergency plans, the NRC. in gu an~ Err States N75/11.0 ;

seemra.yof the commzssion-conjunction with seven other Fcderal lack any d these nu a.t

.nt=7 mm o.e rs.mr ro o-we ems==t agencies, has attempted. on a

3. Shadc1 NRC -... - -

. - in the swoo coce 7somew cooperative and voluntary basis, to associated State and local emergency provide for tr=Hi g and instruction of M8Ponse ;slans be a mqmmnent for State and local government personnel continndeperation of any nuclear Adequacy and Acceptance of and to establish criteria to guide the power piamt with an M=tme opemting Emergency Planning Around Nuclear preparaton of emergucy plans.

h,eense7:Dso, when ahnntd this general Faci!!tses However, the NRC has not made NRC requirernssnt beconne eHectiver (10 CFR Part 50]

sppn. val of State and local emergucy

4. hd WMC N in plans a condition of nuclear power plant the assocanted State andlocal actNcy:U.S. Nuclear Regulatery operation.

emergency response plans be a Commission.

ne accident at'1bree Mlle Island has requirement for the i====r= of any new.

~

AcTioec Advance Notice of Proposed ra24ed a number of questions about the opentinsp.imn== for a numlear power Rulemakmg.

adequacy of radiological emergency... plant? If an, when =WA this general.

response plans.Even before the mquir===-nt bemane *Marefver

.. s sumuum ne Nuclear Regulatory so:ident the GAO had recommanded

5. Md Mn==M assistance be - s.

Commissiot is considering the adoption that NRC not license new power plants provided ::o State and local governments of additional regulations which will for operation unless off-site emergency for radioingical emergency response.

establish as conditions of power reactor plans have been approved by the NRC.

plannmg asnd prepar=d====? If so, to - ~

operationincreased emergency

- CAD. Report to the Congress. " Areas what extent and by what aneens? What '

readM,== for public protection in the Around Nuclear Fadlities Should Be abould be the source cubeInnda!

I vicinity of nuclear power reactors on the Better Prepared For Radiological

6. Should radiological assergency W.

• -l part of both the it-n=ee and local and.

Emergencies." March 30,1979.no response <frilla be a requbemanty If so, 4 Nf s.sta authorities.ne tw=* ion is -

th=4aa is also considering new -

under weese authority:Federst Seate ce # C interested in receivmg public ramn=nt guidance to State and local governments local g.

~ 17 To wh:.t -wtan*

'on objectives for effectzve plans, en emergency pla-ntng. based on an should Faleral. Stats.'and local. -

acceptance criteria for State / local analys:s of a joint NRC-epa Task Force governments and 11'====== be sW..;.

emergency plans.NRC concurrence in Report. "PlannMg Basis for Development to partic=patet.

q 2 y

S:ste and local plans as a sw

=1 -

of State and Local Cover:2menty

7. How and to what art =nt should the for issuance of an operating hconse ce.

Radiological Emergency Response Plans public be infnrm-rf phicejo any -

.-4

.3 1

h x '..

..., -. w.2,.::

. 3 414s4 Federal Register / Vol 44. '.40. 138 / Tuesday. July 17. 1973 / Proposid EnladE'.1 - dk 'W

.j.,

l

-y.-..

For the '=== -

Underaw:tiGaaM.af time PtablicHaahh I 6:1 r

emergency, tasceming emergency actions it might be called upon to takef Sammmm4. Onik.

Service Act(42 N m" Typhoid ~,y that

a. What actions should be talan in Secreamrya(the h=-

. Vaom of5sred forsale.haeter. or

~+

the t c

exchange in intarstata===== ce must] '

lot o response to the recommendations of the pn o

,eess,

.=4 be tiran==d and naaet cartan

' an[d joint NRC/ EPA Task Force Report osa.se came teen e*=

5 that answe its continand safety, padty.

(NUREG. a306/ EPA 5 D/1-78-016J7 Petrocy.and efecamnesa.phas has

9. Under what cirannstances and

.3 using what criteria should a Ih-a requirassants for TyphansLVanr-+n=.orame' -

y 62 in admg snd

.[

typ a oo to wi.e t.a.d ay.

,ood a,,d D,,,, um,,is,,,,io,,

- - w

-r- %

f-the Fedsmal Ragnatar am bcas 4.19e9 (34 four rir a should the pubuc be notified of..

FR M aB W me EWo 1].,

he a incidents?

- (21 f.SR Part 8201 -

- thmugh a20.15 (21 GR a20.20 timm4?,.g ame freq y,ca,smeats menived w m he m!! x:ted and evaluated by the NRC _ _

[Dodetme.79N-es251 * *

. 6:0.15). em Noe===harJR.3sr2138 FR %$

neo

%c48).Undse inwisaren of she:, my vall stad.wMch wm. In turn, sabant aconsw.dations ao proposedrnlas to Bacterial Products; Add!donal adAtia-=1 =*==d==ds m CHf, sad.14(ctL:g (f

the %-mi.=ma Based an the mmm==,,

Standards for Typhoid Vacdne Typhoid Vaccme shall mot be issued by a; r

proi it receives fmn the puh!ic and the Aomocy: Food and Drug Admmistration. the inansdactumr und wnM=n

,,,,.c sta!

notification of nNat ratesse is analysis of tbs problem pm= mad by the gg8-van NRC Caff, the Counnission wG received fmm the Dtrector. Bureen aF I ?

V8C determine whether to proceed with a ruimaasry:ne Foort and Dmg 41ologica (BOB). OfBaal written release P PM proposed rule for notice and ramrnant Administration (FDA) is proposing to is issued.saly after the Descsor has,-

m.

Prer and/or whether to make such rule amend the biologics Typhoid V=rnn, miewed the pmtocol and tested test immediataly effective. Heese-m un regulations to ensure fusther the samplaa to ensure the conH-=d safety..

riot for anticipates completion of this expedited antiseme integrity of the Ty 2 strain f purity, premT. and efectivenema of ru!=maHny in approximately J.ix baeteria.used in vaccine producticr; and Typhoid Vaccine.

mes months.

to require that licensed c9mrmfacturers On the basis of new scimentiSc U

ne NRC staffis presently exmdu: ting obtain the U.S.

city Standard fmm knowledge derrred freus product release the a comprehensive review of all aspects of the Burees of Bio ca.no FDA is also data ac =nlated and ansdyred by BOB the NRC emergency pt=w-+ny and proposing to ammad these regulations cy for the past several years. FDA is -

sep prepandness pmgram. Therefore. 'he establishing new standards for the proposing ama L--

to'the edchtfonal tes,.

Commissionis also intenstedin perform =nem and results of the potency star"'ards for Typhoid Vervsn, bei receivmg comments on all other aspects test foi anda lot of manufactured inch (Sg the followmg:

^ ".

of emergencyplarma includingissues Typhoid Vaccine.

(1)anen Ty 2 af '- --- 1/a typhoecr i6 raised in the Critical Mass /PIRG DATus: Comment by September 17.17N.

Is used in the m=""b*=et of Typhoid.

(,

petition tar rulemr Hng and questions Varma To ensure the =*+penic Anomess: Written comments to the such as the followuyp

10. How and to what extent should the Hearing Clark (HFA-305) Food and integrity of the Ty 2 m FDAis

9 s-I'*

proposing to===ars 5 mm.M W CFR

[

e R

ID N fn F eral ve the of radiological emergency response Fon uman sassomasariose coasvact:

bactena by a Ty2==H-_

D plannmg?

Michaal I. Hootoe. Bureau of Biologics (2) To clarify the source for obtainmg

11. How should Federal agencies (Hh20). Food and Drug necessary reference assem=1=, FDA interfccm with ctate and local Admmistration. Department of Health.

proposes to amend 5 8214: A CFR get governments and the licensee during Education. and Welfare. 8800 Rockville 6:0.12) to tequire that the U.S. Standard emergendest Pike Bethead= MD me. 301-443-1308.

Typhoid Vaccine and the U S. Opacay 1; Should the limusees be required to susspi.ansestrAny seronatAT1ose The Standard he obt=fnad froun the Bureau provide radiological emergency Cocumssioner is proposing to amend the of Biolopuna.

am response traimag for State andlocal biologhes agulations for msnciactunng (3) Sanne is required for use in

]

government personnel? If so, to what Typhoid Vaccme by setting potency dilutions af das vaczame and r4==H=ng.

extent? Should the Federal government standards for the Ty 2 stram of doses used in the potency test. The usi provide such traming?If so, to what Salmonellotyphoso used in the of phosphate-b#.

" emH=== {PBS) by ---

extect?

manufacture of Typhoid Vaccme and by the BOB has notresuhad dua any

13. To what exsant =hauld re kanen be. revising the potency test under ! Bais deunimi changes na tha potency test. '

I placed on licensees for the ase======t (21 CFR 83113) ennmi= tent with new Accordmely. FGA is porposung to====d of the scrum1 ce potential rrmanq-scientific knowiecige derived from past i 620.13fbM1) and (c)(2) to 9

of an arr%mt with regard to imtiatica expenance with the product.

of PBS foe Matung the v=e persait the mee

=== the of protect ve action? To what -re=nt in the Unated States typhoid disease challsene and vaidsene titratsans of.

sbould this rosponsibility be bome by - - has been in det:Ime in recent years and Strain Ty 2 of L'

% syysa,,,,

Federal. State or local goverassants?

routine typhoid racemation is no longer (4) R===d on =*===nsh=.es s, mg.

fili

14. Would public perndpationin recom==adad However,i-=aaw=tice in, and results derived fromm. Typhoed Dr radiologi:al emergency response drilla-is indemandif a person has come into Vaccine potency tests perinrnand at the _

incfuding eescastaan. serve a useful com.sct with a known typhoid camer,if BOB FDA is proposeerto ='a=ad S*

'purposefIf so, what should be the there is an outbreak of typhoid feverin i 6:0.13(e) to roquaru that aerw statistical extent of the public particpatica?

ther=====aity, or if a person plans to methods be used for(sa= u=Wg the I~

Dated at W 6r-ac. this 22th day at travel to an aesa wnere typhaid feuris valichtyof thepoemacytest.Per

s. -

be July. ism and=

consistancy.FDA groposes so esmond 9E1E

~

4002 056

.. suk u M s

a

b. '

e

.("tY B. GON1ALEZ

.-asesie w. h SMALL. muslNESS

--n.- -

= - -

~~~'O. ""

Congregg of tije IHuitch dbtates E ~'" ~

31)ouse of Representatibed

"=2""^"c=^"

~

3 334 pressmaa, h URRAM AFFAIRS m c. -- s-,

Easbington, D.C. 20515 s.A-p rm.

1.m.

$13 238-.t99 EONE WHIPS as.>

esamms

l m L' "'",'",,",M,,,,,

April 23, 1979 o-

-r

=-

+-e

-- n E

1

,u The Honorable James E. Carter ESS.. =,'AL The President of the United States 1.lAIS;..

The White House F

Washington, D.

C.

20500 O 27 hany F

W bl $61K4x.7 Ei mg :..

Dear Mr. President:

6-I believe that there should be a morEtorium on.the

~

issuance of licenses for new nuclear power plants; that f

all plants now in operation should be carefully reviewed for safety; and that no new plants be licensed for operation until questions concerning safety and the integrity of the I

Nuclear Regulatory Commission safety program can be signifi-

=

canti* improved.

~;=

As a person of training and experience in nuclear power, you know the risks better than most people.

You know, for-example, that engineering that is amply safe can be rendered unsafe by improper operation.

You also know that some desdi.gns are safer than others and that some regulatory agencies are more effective than others.

It is clear that certain nuclear power plants are les:s safe B...

than others.

I have had reports that Pilgrim (Boston) is mot

~

~

particularly safe; that Indian Point (New York) poses prob]. ems ;

and you know, of course, about accidents at Browns Ferry (Alabama) and others.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission rates plants on relative safety, and I believe that wherever there is any question about plant safety that plant should be shut down.

You sh.ould ask the Commission to make clear that you would support such at policy.

It is also clear that a good part of the problem at T.hree 5'ile Island was caused by improper operation.

As time passes, it is becoming evident that operator training programs are no table by their absence; that emergency procedures are woe 611y inadequate; 1

and that the self-regulation of the industry caIA 5e counted upon to prevent lax or improper operation.

Commissioner andri.e, him-D 4

6 du 6b 03 6

ugnoram-

,e a

SiiE 5-:

&g

;

E The Hon. James E.

Carter Page April 23, 1979

" ~ " '

s-r-self, recognizes that NRC regulation has been inadequate.

Until mih that can be corrected, there should be no further granting of

/E operational licenses for nuclear power plants.

+

-ll2h There is also growing evidence that not all safety questions

??

have been successfully addressed.

The NRC itself has repudiated "5E its previous estimates on plant safety (the Rasmussen report) and m-listed a large number of unresolved safety issues.

pp Further, the problem of waste disposal has yet to be solved.

Until that is done, the nuclear power industry is, in fact, operat-ing only on an ad hoc basis.

It seems unreasonable to expand the "T--

industry further at a time when its longest lasti.ng problem, waste

=---

disposal, is only now being addressed and is long from being re-m solved.

Not even the most placid community in the country would yE welcome a permanent waste facility, and as you know, temporary

' "'T sites are subject to growing controversy.

._ y _

This is a serious moment for the nuclear power industry.

It l.-

is not a time for reassurances; it is a time for reassessment.

=

Anything less only begs the real issue.

Your leadership in pro-viding a reassessment will resolve questions that have been grow-(_~_

ing for years, and were dramatized by the incident at Three Mile

~

Island.

Respectfully v rs,

/

m f7 Henry B Gonzalez

" 5,.[

Member of Congress

T k

J ml JU o y rim i T i,

~

T o J0 lbj_ 1

_a

~f_'-_'_

s h '.

1002 M8

.