ML19320A848
| ML19320A848 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 06/06/1980 |
| From: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Callis M LANCASTER COUNTY, PA |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8007020677 | |
| Download: ML19320A848 (8) | |
Text
- - - -.3&
C MENT CONTAINSd- %D f
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIOg00R QUAUTY PAGES 8
o',,
)
[ , '
g WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 E
g*
l
- ..+
JUN 6 1980 Mr. Michael B._Callis, Chairman Board of Supervisors Lancaster County Lancaster, Virginia 22503
Dear Mr. Callis:
Thank you for sending me a copy of the resolution on nuclear power adopted 29, 1980.
by the Board of Supervisors of Lancaster County on April After the accident at Three Mile Island, the Nuclear Regulatory Comission decided not to license new nuclear power plants until criteria for improved safety had been developed.
The TMI accident has shown that there is a need for improvements in the The Nuclear Regulatory Comission has found that approach to safety.
actions recommended by its own staff and by the President's Comission on the Accident at Three Mile Island in the areas of human factors, operational safety, emergency planning, nuclear power plant design and siting, health effects, and public information are necessary and Interim measures have been taken, and under review is an feasible.
Action Plan that will include other safety improvements, detailed criteria for their implementation, and various implementation deadlines.
Meanwhile, in order tu avoid unnecessary delays, the Comissioners have approved the issuance of NRC licenses for three nuclear power plants to load fuel and, under specified conditions, to operate at low power levels for testing.
The Nuclear Regulatory Comission is working with the nuclear industry to ensure the public health and safety at all nuclear power plants that are Any currently in operation or that may start operating in the future.
plants that are found to be unsafe will not be allowed to operate.
With regard to the development of a nuclear waste disposal program, this is treated in the enclosed message of February 12, 1980, to the Congress from the President concerning the establishment of a comprehensive radioactive waste management program.
8007020679 g.
. JUN 6 1960 Mr. Michael B. Callis As to prc 'iding the public with accurate information about nuclear power, Examples are the Report of the much effort is being devoted to this.
President's Commission on the Accident at Three Mile Island, a report on Three Mile Island by a Special Inquiry Group of the Nuclear Regulatory j
Commission, and numerous other NRC reports and news releases on all The Annual Report aspects of the regulation of nuclear power plants.
of the NRC summarizes its activities; the issue for 1979 will be published soon.
Sincerely, I
S&$
f Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
As stated
\\
t l
i February 12,1980 i
I 3
Office of. the White House Press Secretary a
t THE WHITE HOUSE TO THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES:
Today I am establishing this* Nation's first comprehensive My paramount objective radioactive vaste management program.
in managing nuclear wastes is to protect the health and safety I
I share this of all Americans, both now and in the future.
f responsibility with elected officials at all levels of our Our citizens have a dee; concern that the beneficial uses af nuclear technology, including the generation government.
g j
of electricity, not be allowed to imperil public health or i
safety now or in the future.
For more than 30 years, radioactive wastes have been generated by programs for national defense, by the commercial nuclear power program, and by a variety of medical, industrial i
and research activities. Yet past governmental efforts to P.
manage radioactive wastes have not been technically adequate.
{
Moreover, they have failed to involve successfully the States, local governments, and the public in policy or program decisions.
My actions today lay the foundation for both a technically superior progran and a full cooperative Federal _ State partner-ship to ensure public confidence in a waste management program.
My program is consistent with the broad consensus that has evolved from the efforts of the Interagency Review Group on Ra lioactive Waste Management (IRG) which I established.
The IRG findings and analysis were comprehensive, thorough f
and widely reviewed by public, industey and citizen groups, l
State and local governments, and members of the Congress.
4.
Evaluations of the scientific and technical analyses were lt obtained through a broad and rigorous peer review by the The final recommendations benefited 8
scientific community.
from and reflect this input.
My objective is to establish a ecmprehensive program My for the management of all types of radioactive wastes.
i policies and programs establish mechanisms to ensure that
~
R elected officials and the public fully participate in waste j
decisions, and direct Federal departments and agencies to laplement a vaste management strategy which is safe, technically 6
sound, conservative, and open to continuous public review.
i This approach will help ensure that we will reach our f
objective __ the safe storage and disposal of all forms of l.
nuclear waste.
I Our primary objective is to isolate existing and futurs radioactive waste from military and civilian activities from ll the biosphere and pose no significant threat to public health b
The responsibility for resolving military and and aarety.
eiv111an waste management problems shall not be deferred to future generations. Tha technical program must meet all relevant radiological protection criteria as well as all other This effort must proceed applicable regulatory requirements.
regardless of future developments within the nuclear industry _-
Its future size, and resolution of specific fuel cycle and The specific steps outlined below reactor design issues.
are each aimed at accomplishing this overall objective.
more t 1
~-
(CVER) s
=
S e
' ' ~ ^ '
s t
2 1
First,'ay Admia'istration is committed to providing an effec-tive role for State and local governments in the development and implementation of our nuclear waste management program. I am therefore taking the following actions:
By Executive Order, I as establishing a State Planning o
Council which will strengthen our intergovernmental relationships and help fulfill our joint responsibility to protect public health and safety in radioactive waste matters. I have asked Governor Riley of South Carolina to serve as Chairman of the Council. The Council will have a total of 19 members: 15 who are Governors or other elected officials, and 4 from the Executive, departments and agencies. It will advise the Executive Branch and work with the Congress to address radioactive waste management issues, such as planning and siting, construction, and operation of facilities. I will submit legislation during this session to make the Council permanent.
In the past,. States have not played an adequate part O
in the waste management planning process -- for example, in the evaluation and location of potential waste disposal sites. The States need better access to information and expanded opportunity to guide waste management planning. Our relationship with the States will be based on the principle of consultation and concurrence in the siting of high level waste reposi-tories. Under the framework of consultation and concurrence, a host State will have a continuing role in Federal decisionmaking on the siting, design and construction of a high level. waste repository.
State consultation and concurrence, however, will lead to an acceptable solution to our waste disposal problem only if all the States partleipate as partners in the program I am putting forth. The safe disposal of radioactive waste, defense and commercial, is a national, not just a Federal, responsibility.
I as directing the Secretary of Energy to provide o
financial and technical assistance to States and other jurisdictions to facilitate the full participation of State and local government in review and licensing proceedings.
Second, for disposal of high level radioactive waste, I am adopting an interia planning strategy focused on the use of mined geologic repositories capable of accepting both vaste from reprocessing and unreprocessed commercial spent fuel.
An interim strategy is needed since final decisions on many steps which need to be taken should be preceded by a full environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act.
In its search for suitable sites for high level waste l
repositories, the Department of Energy has mounted an expanded and diversified program of geologic investigations that recognizes the importance of the interaction among geologic setting, repository host rock, waste form and other engineered barriers i
on a site-specific basis. Immediate attention will fo'cus l
on research and development,.and on locating and characterizing a number of potential repository sites in a variety of different geologic environments with diverse rock types. When four to five sites have been evaluated and found potentially suitable, one or more will be selected for further development as a licensed full-scale repository.
acre f
I Y
v, _.
i 3
It is 'importsdi to stress the following two points:
because the suitability of a geologic disposal site can beFirst, verified onl evaluations,y through detailed and time-consuming site specific be carefully examined. actual sites and their geologic environments must s.in a careful step-by-step manner.Second, the development of will procea and information gained at each phase will be reviewed and Experience evaluated to determine if there is sufficient knowledge to proceed with the next stage of development.
ready to select the site for the first full-scale repository We should be by about 1985 and have For reasons of economy,it operational by the mid-1990's.
j.
should accept both defense and commercial wastes.the first and subseq Consistent with ay' decision to expand and diversify the Department of Energy's program of geologic investigation befo selecting a specific site for repository development, I have re decided that,the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant project sho ld be cancelled.
unlicensed dispoThis project is currently authorized for the u
defense program, sal of transuranic waste from our National This project is inconsistent with my policyand for defense waste.
th.**
all repositories.sr highly radioactive waste be lic anu tnat they accept both defense and commercial wastes.
- ensed, The site near Carlsbad.
for this project, wial continue to be evaluated along withNew Mexico, other sites in other parts of the country.
it will be reserved as one of several candidate sites for If qualified, possible use as a licensed repository for defense and commerci l high level wastes.
My fiscal year 1981 budget contains funds in the commercial nuclear waste program for protection and a
continued investigation of the Carlsbad site.
is importan* that we take the time to compare the New Mexic Finally, it site with other sites now under evaluation for the first was o
reposi tory.
Over the next five years carry out an sggressive progen,a of scientific and technicalthe Departme investigations to support waste solidification, packaging and repository design and construction including several experimental, retrievable emplacements in test facilities This supporting research and development program will call
)
upon the knowledge and experience of the Nation's very best l
people in science, engineering and other fields of learning and will include participation of universities, industry and the government departments, agencies, and national laboratori i
es.
is available, waste must and will continue to be cared fo safely.
the Department of Energy will ensure close and meticulous control over defense waste facilities which are vital to our national security.
storage of these wastes as long.as necessaryI as committed to maint adequate funding available for that purpose. and to making sites that will lead the processing, packaging, and ultima We will also transfer to a permanent repository of the transuranic wastes from defense prograss. high level and a responsibility of the utilities.In contrast, storage of commercial spent to permanent disposal.inte.-In spent fuel storage capacity is not an alternative However, adequate storage is necessary i
nore
)
(CVER)
4 4
until repositoriet are available. I urge the utility industry to continue to take all actions necessary to store spent fuel in a manner that will protect the public and ensure efficient and safe operation of power reactors. However, a limited amount of government storage capacity would provide flexibility to our national waste disposal program and an alternative for those utilities which are unable to expand their storage
'ca pa bilities.
I reiterate the need for early enactment of my proposed spent nuclear fuel legislation. This proposal would authorize the Department of Energy tos (l Fdesign, acquire or construct, and operate one or more awaf-fron-reactor storage facilities, and (2) accept for storage, until permanent disposal facilities are available, domestic spent fuel, and a limited amount of foreign spent fuel in cases when such action would further our non-proliferation policy objectives. All costs of storage, i
including the most of locating, constructing and operating permanent geol'bgic repositories, will be recovered through fees paid by utilitie.s and other users of the services and will ultimately be borne by those who benefit from the activities generating the wastes.
Fourth, I have directed the Department of Energy to work jointly with states, other government agencies, industry and other organizations, and the public, in developing national plans t2 < establish regional disposal sites for commercial low level vaste. We must work together to resolve the serious near-term p.oblem of low level waste disposal. While this task is not inherantly difficult from the standpoint of safety, it requires better planning and coordination. I endorse the actions being taken by the Nation's governors to tackle this problem and direct tne Secretary of Energy to work with them in support of their effort.
Fifth, the Federal programs for regulating radioactive waste storage, transportation and disposal are a crucial con-ponent of our efforts to ensure the health and safety of Americans. Although the existing authorities and structures are basically sound, laprovements must be made in several areas. The current authority of the Nuclear Regulatory Consission to license the disposal of high level waste and low level waste in commercial facilities should be extended to include spent fuel storage, and disposal of transuranic waste and non-defense low level waste in any new government facilities. I as directing the Environmental Protection Agency to consult with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to resolve issues of overlapping jurisdiction and phasing of regulatory actions. They should also seek ways to speed up the promulgation of their safety ragulations. I an also directing the Department of Transpc rtation and the Environ -
mental Protection Agency to improve both the efficiency of their regulatory activities and their relationships with other Federal agencies and state and local governments.
Sixth, it is essential that all aspects of the waste management program be conducted with the tullest possible disclosure to and participation by the public and the technical community. I an directing the departments and agencies to develop and improve mechanisms to ensure such participation and public involvement consistent with the need to protect national security information. The waste management program will be carried out in full compliance with the National Environmental F.olicy Act.
sore
/
I
o i
5 i
Seventh, beca0se nuclear waste management is a problem i
I shared by many other countries and decisions on waste manage-ment alternatives have nuclear proliferation implications, i
I will continue to encourage and support bilateral and multi-lateral efforts which advance both our technical capabilities and our understanding of spent fuel and waste management options.
-which sre consistent with our aon-proliferation policy.
In its role as lead agency for the management and disposal of radioactive wa.stes and with cooperation of the other relevant Federal agencies, the Department.of Energy is preparing a detailed National Plan for Nuclear Waste Management to imple-1 ment these policy guidelines and the other recossendations of the IRG. This Plan will provide a clear road map for all parties and will give the public an opportunity to review the entirety of our program. 'It will include specific progras goals and milestones for all aspects of nuclear waste manage-I ment. A draf t-of the comprehensive National Plan will be distributed by the Secretary of Energy later this year for public and Congress 16nal review. The State Flanning Council will be directly involved it the development of this plan, j
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission now has underway an faportant proceeding to provide the Nation with its judgment on whether or not it has confidence that radioactive wastes produced by nuclsar power reactors can and will be disposed of safely. I urge that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission do so in a thorough and timely manner and that it provide a full opportunity for public, technical and government agency participation.
Over the past two years as I have reviewed various aspects of the radioactive waste problem, the complexities and diffi-culties of the issues have become evident -- both from a technical and, more importantly, from an institutional and political perspective. However, based on the technical con-clusions reached by the IRG, I as persuaded that the capability now exists to characterize and evaluate a number of geologic environments for use as repositories built with conventional mining technology. We have already made substantial progress and changes in our programs. With this comprehensive policy and its laplementation through the FY 1981 buoget and other actions, we will complete the task of reorienting our efforts i
I in the right direction. Many citimens know and all must under-I.
We stand that this problem will be with us for many years.
aust proceed steadily and with determination to resolve the remaining technical issues while ensuring full public partici-l pation and maintaining the full cooperation of all levels of government. We will act surely and without delay, but I
we will not compromise our technical or scientific standards out of haste. I lcok forward to working with the Congress j
and the states to implement this policy and build public i
confidence in the ability of the government to do what is required in this area to protect the health and safety cL' our citimens.
~
JIMMY CARTER THE WHITE HOUSE, i
i
14686
- u. s. novtanssurr mwnns omm ms-co-us
.. e,
. ~..
m.~a-
~...,u.
...w...
a..
.w a
.W DATE OF DOCUMENT DATE RECENED 80' Jerry L. Davis 4/29/80 H 5/8/80 NRR-4027 County Administrator Virgina TO ORfG.;
CC.
OTHER X
H. R. Denton aCT o= ucEssaar g
ccaCuaaE=Cs O
5/29/80 no aCTio= wCEssaav O ocaaaa' O
CLAS$sp POST OFFICE FILE CODE.
REG NO DESCRiPTeON (Must Se Uncises*8881 REFERRED TO DATE RECEIVED By DATE SUBMITS RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF P. Fine 5/15 NUCLEAR ENERGY Copies To:
- actosua*5 H. R. Denton E. G. Case i
PPAS v
B. Snyder
[.,
B. Grimes j
D. Eisenhut R. Vollmer D.'Ross
- 5. Hanauer RF..R.
[
h8# pliace 10fGre~ff en distribatigg son-r any reply. Also return eristaal follow control ticket to 10lGreft ellen totion completed.
u s uCttaa aEcutafoRv Co==,ss.o FoR C u.
i
~
I s oL5 v 0i..O f n
g.
l YIRGIRIA:
At a regular neeting of the roard of Supervisors of Lancaster County,
,I
.l, held at the Courthouse, in the District Court Room of said County, on the.
\\ 29th day of April, at 10:00 a.m.
I-h'esent: Michael B. Callis, Chaiman s
- f
~ John E. Roughton John J. Ca1dsell, Vice-Chaiman J
Upon motion by John E. Boughton, and unanimously carried,
}y the follouing resolution was adopted regarding support for nuclear energy:
L
.l WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Lancaster County, Virginia, is
- deeply concerned that the present policy of producing electric energy is too t6
] dependent upon the' use of oil which is both costly and limited in supply, and fl WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Lancaster County recognises the (importance of using nuclear produced v>uer that.is far less expensive and not t
i subject to a limited supply, and l
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors contends that power and energy in l
l abundant supply are necessary for the continued growth and security of our 4 nation and the economic veil being of its citizens and that nuclear energy Q must be allowed to play a significans role as an energy source for the foreseeable future if any measumble degree of self-sufficiency in the j production of power and energy required for these purposes is to be attained, t,
ROW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of 1
l Lancaster County, Virginia, does hereby, in order to cecomplish the foregoing, jurgethat:
ll (1) the montorium on nuclear power plant licensing be lifted, ll (2) Licensing procedures for nuclear plants be simplified and h
shortened,
't (3) the Fede n t government agressively proceed with the development f
of a nuclear vaste dispcsal program, (4) all appropriate agencier of the Fedent government vork with the nuclear industry in a coopentive effort to achieve the ultimate, in safety of design conttruction, and opention of nuclear.
~
facilities, i
(5) the Fedent goverrreent assume, its responsibility for providing the American people with accumte and trw' inform 1 tion about
{
nuclear pover.
l BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that copies of this resolution be mailed to the y Chaiman of the Ruclear Regulatory Comission, Senator Harry F. Bytti, Senator
} John Warner, Ccngressman Paul Trible, State Senator John Chichester, and
- Delegate Calvin C. Sanford.
(
O
~.0,y i
Teste:
I!
/
V t
a e
ggg Jey. yis, Coa.ty a,inistatn l
i