ML20033C432
| ML20033C432 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon, San Onofre, Crane  |
| Issue date: | 10/26/1981 |
| From: | Carter J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Scull B, Scully B AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8112030203 | |
| Download: ML20033C432 (6) | |
Text
/
\\
[$
0 3
DISTRIBUTION:
L Central File ' E. Case R. Vollmer a
' :NRC PDRi.
'H. Denton
- 6. Snyder iTERA f ~
PPAS S. Cavanaugh (81-499. Q TSB R/F D. Eisenhut g RLQg PFine S. Hanauer dV W
JCarter R. Mattson N ' g(f#d.(7'h.
lis. Becky Scully HThompson T. Murley N
j" LO b
007f 1981%
10306 Santana Panch Dr.
(E N 5
Santee, California 92071 OCT 2 61981 q%'
y e
\\p%
C'
Dear Ms. Scully:
This is in reply to your letter of August 18, 1981, to President Reagan a
about administration plans to expedite nuclear power.
Enclosed is a statenent by the President on nuclear-power policy, issued on October 8, 1981. Ilith regard to your concern about nuclear wastes, see policy initiative (4) on page 2 of the statement.
liith respect to your concern about the San Onofre nuclear power plant, Unit I has been operating since 1967 and there has been no evidence of any ham to the public. The operating utility has been directed by the Nuclear Regulatory Connission (flRC) to pro'ceed with a reanalysis of the unit's ability to withstand earthquakes and neanwhile has agreed to upgrade certain structures.
For San Onofre Units 2 and 3, which are under construction, the flRC staff has concluded that the applicants for -
an operating license utilized procedures and criteria for analysis that provide an acceptable basis for design to withstand earthquakes and that the manner in which the design criteria were inplcnented was acceptable.
An flRC Atonic Safety and t.icensing Board has completed extensive hearings on the seisnic aspects of San Onofre Units 2 and 3, and a decision by the Board will be forthconing.
As to your concern about the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant, the review of the seismic design has been the nost extensive ever undertaken by the flRC staff. The goal of the staff was to assure that denonstrably
- onservative practices were followed at each level of design. The flRC Atomic Safety and Licensing Board found that all structures, systens, and ccaponents of the plant would perfom as required during any reasonable carthquake. This decision was affimed by the flRC Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board. The flRC has issued a license for testing and low power operation of Diablo Canyon Unit 1.
On Septenber 28, 1981, the utility infomed the f!RC staff of a potential problen in the analysis of certain piping systens and is reviewing the seisnic design of the systens involved. Resolution of this problen is subject to approval by the fiRC before fuel is placed in the reactor.
6 tlith reference to the accident at Threc !!ile Island (TitI), actions were
h O
[ ' h. '(A taken by the flRC and by the licensed utilities innediately after that accident to inprove the safety of all nuclear power pla_nts in operation.
tihen the various reconnendations of the principal investigations of the g
accident becane available, the f:RC developed an Action Plan, published piQppv in itay 1980, to inplement safety inprovenents. Of the 140 discrete actions app aoved for innlenentation. about 30 have boon ennnletnd and T.
the remaind 2r are schedu led for conpletion over t! e next two years.
omcq
...... ~.... -. ~. -
~ ~ ~ ~... ~.. ~.
sunnud 112030203 B11026
- ~ ~.- -.. -..~. - - ~ ~.
~ ~ ~ ~ - -.
~ ~ ~ ~ -. ~...
goaaoocxosooog...........................................................................
o, nne ronu sis oo-comncu ono OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usceoani-sas-,eo
g g
y
- OCT 2 6 1981 liith regard to energency plans, no operating license for a nuclear power reactor will be issued unless a finding is nade by the l'RC that the state of onsite and offsite crergency preparedness provides reasonably
-assurance that adequate protective neasures can and will be taken in the event of a radiological energency. The HRC will base its finding on a review of the findings of the Federal Energency-f4anagement Agency and deteminations as to whether State and local energency plans are adequate e
and capable of being inplemented. and on the NRC assessnent as to whether the applicant's onsite energency plans are adequate and capable of being inplemented.- For operating power reactors, if the NRC finds that the state of energency preparedness does not provide reasonable assurance q
that appropriate protective measures can 'and will be taken in the event of a radiological energency and if the deficiencies are not corrected within four months of that finding, the Connission will detemine whether the reactor shall be shut down until such deficiencies are renedied or whether other enforconent action is appropriate.
Every effort is being nade to assure the protection of the public health and safety for all nuclear power plants that are currently in operation or that may begin operation in the future.
Sincerely.
Origini EIEnCd D7 Jerry Carter. Acting Chief Technical Support Branch Planning and Program Analysis Staff Office of. 'tfuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
As stated 7
I i
t.
1 s,
I
\\'
k -
1
\\
\\(
.s TSB:NRR
- RR'
.............. f..g s
OFFICE)
...............a......
. a..a a nana.a u
~~aaana..~.a.
a.
..a a. a..a a.
.. **
- a a * *a a' a a '
......i n e/..LU4 Carter PF
~~~>
.a............-.....
...~.-...-a--.-
.1%i.za.1....!.9.67.h.............!8.1...
\\
om>
L unc ronu m oo-con nacu cao --
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
- uso m e -n m
~.
_ = _...
o THE WHITE HOUSE i;
Office of the Press Secretary For Immc'diate Release Ioctober 8, 1981 STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT f
A ~more abundant, affordable, and secure. energy future for -
all Americans is a critical element of this Administration's
~
economic recovery program. While homeowners and business firms.have shown remarkable ingenuity and resourcefulness in meeting their energy needs at lower cost through conservation, it is evident that sustained economic growth over the decades ahead will require additional. energy supplies. This is particularly true of electricity, which will supply an increasing share of.our energy.
If we are to meet this need for new energy supplies, we must move rapidly.to eliminate unnecessary government barriers to efficient utilization of. our abundant, economical resources of coal and uranium.. It is equally vital that the -
utilities - ' investor-owned, public, and co-ops -- be able to develop new generating capacity that will permit them to' supply their customers at the l'owest cost,.be.it coal, nuclear, hydro, o,r new technologies such as fuel cells.
~
'One of the best potential.soyrces.of new.alectribal. energy supplies'in the coming decades is nuclear power. The U.S.
has developed a str.ong. technological. base in the production er electricity from nuclear energy. Unfortunately; the Federal
- overnment has created a regulatory environment that is forcing j
i many utilities to rule.out nuclear.. power.as a source of new
' generating capacity, even.when their. consumers may face unnecessarily high electric rates as s' result. Nuclear power j
has become entangled in a morass of regulations that do not
~
enhance safety but that do cause extensive. licensing delays-and economic uncertainty. Covernment has also. failed in meeting i
its responsibility to work with industry to develop an acceptable
. system for commercial waste disposal..which has.further hampered nuclear power development!
'To correct present government deficiencies and to enable nuclear power to make its essential. contribution to our future energy needs I an announcing today a series of policy.
{
initiatives:
t (1) I an directing the Secretary of Energy to give' I
immediate priority attention to recommending improvements in the nuclear regulatory and licensing process. I anticipate that the Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission will take steps to facilitate the licensing of plants under-construction and those awaiting licenses. - Consistent with.
' i public health and safety, we must remove unnecessary obstacles to deployment of the current generation of nuclear. power'reacters.
The time involved to proceed' from the planning stage to. an 1
operating license for new nuclear power plants has more'than
(
doubled since the mid-1970s and is presently some 10 This process must be streamlined,'with the objective of' years.
shortening the time involved to 6-8 years, as.is typical in'some other countries.
aore (CVEF.)
n.-_.n.wwa
^ l-'
--w 3
-n r
viww-w
=-w%+-
s.iW e
7-
-r
r 2
(2) I am directing that government agencies proceed with the demonstration of breeder reactor technology, including completion of the Clinch River Breeder' Reactor. This is essential-to ensure our preparedness for longer-term nuclear power'needs.
(3) I am lif ting the indefinite ban which previous Administraticas placed on cEmmercial reproe.sssing activities
- in the United States. In addition, we will pursue consistent:,
long-term ' policies concerning reprocessing of spent fuel from nuclear power reactors and eliminate regulatory impediments to commercial interest in this technology, while ensuring adequate safeguards.
It is important that the private sector take the lead in dev' eloping commercial reprocessing sefvices. Thus I am also requesting the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, working with the Secr,etary of Energy, to undertake -a study of the feasibility of obtaining economical plutonium supplies for the Department of Energy by means of a competitive procurement. By encouraging private firms to supply fuel for the breeder program at a cost that does not exceed that of government-produced plutonium, we may be able
.to provide a stable market for private sector reprocessing,
'and simultaneously reduce the funding needs of the U.S. breeder demonstration progr,am.
(4) I am instructing the Secretary of Energy, we'rking closely with industry and state governments, to proceed swiftly toward deployment of means of storing and disposing of comme' cial r
high-level radioactive waste. We udst take steps now to accomplish this objective and demonstrate io.the-public that problems associated with management of nuclear waste can be resolved.
(5}' 1 ' recognize that some of the problems besetting the nuclear option are of a deep-seated nature and may not be quickly resolved. Therefore, I am directing 'the Secretary of Energy and the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy to meet with representatives from the universities, private industry and the utilities and requesting them to report to me on the obstacles which stand in the way of increased use of nuclear energy and the steps needed to overcome them in order to assure the continued availability of nuclent pouer to meet America's future energy needs not later than September 30, 1982.
Eliminating the regulatory problems that hnve burdene'd nuclear power will be of little use if the utility _ sector cannot raise the capita 1'necessary to fund construction of new generating facilities. We have already taken significant steps to improve the climate for capital formation with the passage of my program.for economic recovery. The tax bill contains substantial incentives designed to attract new capital into industry.
-~
Safe, commercial nuclear power can help meet America's future energy needs. The policies and actions that I am announcing today will permit a revitalization of the U.S.
industry's efforts to develop nuclear power. In this way, native American genius - not arbitrary federal policy -- will
'be free to provide for our energy future.
e h aS k
m
///( -
(
9 Ms. Eocky Scully
/
10306 Santana Ranch Dr.
' h Santee, Ca. 92071 e
~
~~
Aug. 16 1961 o
President Ronald Rea6cn 1600 Fennsylvania Ave., N.W.
r Washington D.C. 20500
Dear President Reagan,
I am up-set with a recent article I read in the " San Diego Union" (Sunday Aug.16 front page) and with +ka r'a"=
+n i spe Diablo Canyon-a-low-power permit. to start operation.
It seems y M ifministration plahs7 o eYFedite nuclear power.
Removin6 the obstacles to construction of current generation L
of nuclear reactors meanin5 I presume; San Onofre #2 and #3 and 1Diablo Canyon, both of which are built on active earthquake f aults.
San Onofre also has inadequate emer6ency evacuation plans.
The
{plant is sandwiched'ihEbetween San Diego and L. A. this is very frightenin5-If the obstacles are removed to construction, does this mean tcuttin5 what little safety standards the N.R.C. has?.1 Remember i
Three Mile Island?
The emer5ency coolin5 system failed (fact is it never worked properly; it was designed wrong), and other safety features railed.
This compounded with two operators making a few mistakes, added up into a huge ni htmare.
" Murphy's Law" seems 5
to Go hand in hand with nuclear power "What ever can happen will happen".
We must not hook up a Government (taxpayers) fed " life sup-port unit" into a dead industry.
Last ni ht on the news I watched 5
as the media gave a breakdown of how much money has been sunk into San Onofre 91; some where in the neighborhood of 126 =illion dollars (The construction costs were in 1967 dollars).
Last year alene c0 million dollars were spent in repairs.
Start adding
. construction costs of units #2 ar.d-53 and Diablo Canyon; which I understand is a couple billion, and it pretty easy te see why the owners of these nuke plants want to put them on line at any coat includin6 lives.
Wouldn't it be a lot easier and safer, not to mention wiser, in the long run, for our country to adopt a good energy policy based on conservation and renewable resources?
I shutter to think of whatc could happen.
"The Brookhaven Report" says the worst case accident (meltdown) could render hn aren the size of Pennsylvania uninhabitable.
0
e
.y,.;. -.
As far as safe levels of radiation there's no safe level, continued bomb-bardment adds up and some things like iodine-131 l
and cesium become concentrsted in our food chains.
I went to Jr. high and High school.in Fallbrook.
I was shocked to learn that San Cnofre is 11 miles up-wind from Fallbrook.
The infant mor-tality rate is 26.4 per 1000 live births Escondido, Oceanside are
[
half.that, low income San Diego is only 11 5 per 1000.
Why?
Could it be pregnant women and childern are the most subseptsble to radiation?
What is ~,oin5 to happen with the added burden of units #2 and #37 Will the rate increase?
Af ter the fuel cycle la completed, what do we do with nuclear jwastes? A law of ecology I learned is, "everythin6 must So some rplace".' " Matter is neithet-crer.ted nor destroyed, but merely-l changed from one form to anothe"
Some of this " matter" stays
) radioactive for a cuarter of a aillion years.
I don't know of any.
y place on earth ifit to dump this Sarbage except maybe Iran; But t that wouldn't be too cool because even with their mentality they i
would figure out how to build bombs.
Right now my Kom and Ead live 4
an hourb drive from the biggest nuclear dumpin5 6round in the world, the Savannha River Project in South Carolina.
Please, Mr. President don't let nuclear power be my Generations Vietnam.
Our country needs a Good short and lon6 ran6e energy plan stressin5 CONSERVATION and positive renewable resources like solar, (Geothermal, wind, hydro-electric, and co-Seneration to name a few.
'Please don't think I am un-patriotic I love.this country as much as you do.
I know you are doin5 your best to help our country i
back on its feet, but please don't 16nore the environment in the process.
I can't say I agree with everything you are doin5, but over all you_are doinga' good job.
I must admit you have a great sense of humor, I really enjoy this in a person.
Thank for reading this far.
I know you are very busy and I thank you for'your time.
Sincerely yours,
/
s Becky Scully
?
- - -