ML20070R581
| ML20070R581 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinch River |
| Issue date: | 02/11/1982 |
| From: | Bouguard M, Fuqua D, Roe R HOUSE OF REP., SCIENCE, SPACE & TECHNOLOGY (FORMERLY |
| To: | Palladino N NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20069D029 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-82-516 NUDOCS 8302030109 | |
| Download: ML20070R581 (7) | |
Text
~
N 7
. v - =<* naa. r64. - ( II)h ~ QM A - -.c u.
- .. J. m ,. ,
l~a".77
?.*""' C ". *""*f."M."' **"- ,
"%*."L"l";"
uu, n=u"iuor.-t". = ","'.s
-=. m =ll2f".O=O.1"ll1 c v a. . . COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY M=====
ScenSES.MOPP JAset.9 J.F.ApeCMAAD. MacM. EDeWIN B. PORSYTMt. .aJ.
'*'* ""'*-l,b ,, Z",*,^""ig' ,, ,,,, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES '*"",L."*^",;,'*-
O,",."";",,", ",t ;;.T. ""Or "- surrr un maysunn souse orrier suitoino "=r,T
' " " " ~ " '
F.cn no'c."- rs."ra. 7," %.Y.Murn. n.v. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20515
[==-=],'1". ,'"au[o=L.="=a =4.
cL Goz)2256371 =EUeS ~i====
STAp4E, M. LA8 DeNE. h.Y. BALL LOwEmT. CALJr.
" February 11, 1982 .
/ 7.
'".',."i.*"".6. va.== . . ';, A,
%".l'uSEcaur.
Hon. Nunzio J. Palladino Chairman Nuclea r Regulatory Commission .
Washington, D. C. 20555
Dear Mr. Chai rman:
We note that the Commission has received a request- from the Secre-tary of Energy to begin preliminary siting work relative to the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Project. This facility is a vital ele-ment of the government's research and development program relating to the liquid metal fast breeder reactor.
As you may know, the Conferees' language (attached) on the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-35) states-that-Congress -
wants this project to "be constructed in a timely and expeditious manner". The Floor statements in both Houses, which are also at-tached, further support this conclusion. We would, therefore, con-firm that the Secretary's request is consistent wi th Congressional I intent.
, _, Sincerely, V
a )
'DGi FV,QUA
.AuflLu N, JR.
Member of o gress fARRY'I Mem of Con ss
'Y% ~Y - A 0AAA, Aft 1r
~G '0@JAT ER , J R.
' ROBERT ROE BARRY Member of Congress Membe of Gngress l
W_ J $ : =-!
ffARIL'64 BOUQUldb
.-rw U L LUJAN, JRT/
Member of Congress em er of Congress h1
-~~
i P302030109 821229 PDR FOIA WEISS82-516 PDR
O O
. (,
Hon. Nunzio J. Palladino ,
February 11, 1982 Page 2
%-d >KKAia
/ RONNIE G. FL I PPO F/
M- ~~-
JO SKEEN Member of Congress ..ber -of Congress
'7'L O v /
ROBERT A. YOUNG ' BILL L WERY " -
Member of Cong Memb r of Congr
% L n0%
RAEPR HALL Member o M'.;f Co gress 1
WILLIAM CARNEY Member of Congress (J
1 f..-.
ALBERT GORE, JR. HAROLD HOLLENBECK Member of Congr ss Mem r of Congress y
- ED FORSYTHE Member of Congress e
m, ,, 7=ga- w- > a- L; 4. - , ;. .
, ,A , . .. . . ,. 4y.,;, .gyj ., p .;. u _,, q ,4 ,y
/.* * . *
/.. .
..~.
-Q
. . . . ~ - -- . . . . .
.g-
. . > ,. .. w , w.
- .J. '. : + >.
.n..; * * <. t . e - . -
.. ,. e r
- 6h 4 % *t...., .
.. - .u.. .,t.. f.*-
- 1*
. =9;,;s-- e n, .c ., . - , ; - ~ - " *' '***-=.-**-
'A."-**- - * .% S, *-=* %. ;:ww m.** - _..._ ..
, . . -7. 4.aeg , [t. .%- -* ,N*/ 8,4.v l.* .Ir S ~
- _- . .m y 4* :- .. .,<. ,, .. .
.'%.; Y','n ,,q. ,1 i;Jr 3-SM e.; . g.... j*.C.h. f s.e s
, , .4De#N# s.p4 - . .M- > i.
Q3 .L_' h ,p, ,g .r s >y-! .4. N -c M.iJr;..' M- s. , ~ .*
. . - y .
7^. * * ' A T2[/h t'e.% '.- . 4.r ey.:*p.e 2
~h M["f *i- '{ (. . -g. 1;* ,--g
...,s.ww, k er ,. . . _
aw. g&A M .=.r. W e .
j ;.;.;.%
%es-* R; * . Q.;s*~!": . .q * . r ...-. . . . . , . ,
_ ._ tp ,, ,
, s 4x ., y - --~ , c ~;;e.. -
5 N '
. . . .J, +m e. s . b.%
t
.- ~ .:q. .. . =.. r.,-- f. &g .
.;- L. ,- s*. ' . -Q&u* gW., .
.f ~ .~ ,:j.,4g* t 977n Coxcarss . .. . -
,mf.n.*,. fg,'.',,.).g&. .
1st Bession ) BOUSE OF REPRESMATIVESf No,D*T s,-208 " ~ ' '
..
- rf
- j
...o-- * * ,.. . ;: ). ,...
%. .~.,,
- *'" n '5-< .
.y s, (.1.
pp,. '.as l * .
t --
& ., j. .* n. . . ,.- N.- e.. .n -
' i.>. . . . :;. % ,w,q D& '* *. ' Y $
M~Y,W.**s***.Qh.e 0 *& #
,. ~ L.3,,';.,., Q .
NO. 3
'.' .-*?.
kd'J.'-3-F-G. ,.r. W '~
W&.p$*N5?$$5, e- % . .s:c KSK. .,, ...a - . >. . n. .L. .
n/
Y M. . :.E,O.. 'n . d....
.m W'Jd+*
- M, .. OMNIBUS BUDGET RECONCILIATION ACT OF 1981
[n -
'g.< 4. gu.: . .'.a?y
- 5 n._
.y M y*,iy * .;'\.Q : . e:: --
R.> m&.=Q:,t d'-~ ' * * .vn ^
W Y.
ptb6!. b W.
,c.: .,a:.m4..:.g.? .n.y . .
c
.'....v: .&x. , .. w.
. ,. ..n, . . .
7---.1::. -
- .::;me.wT y;g.. ;.3: .s. u .-
. . .g. c
. -*3.
.v..,%. cm- u.s
=z 5: .
ingpSb . p. 3%jg.n. ;-t.a,$n CONFERENCE REPORT " ~'
.. . . - < . 1
~ y(Sk .
- M.c
.a .we f..,W,kMhI.
...m@. h.. .M .Wr. -4<.'M
..ne g20 n- . v. .~. .u r
Q-. 'r, ,.'R,,y,l3g' &-e x>&;. ,.Mk.. -*'
p .- r
..?.
c.
- ~.w -e
- <--W
- m.* , i )-X>
. n. .,.m..sr.
w%. A s . .e-% ,
.,e -
~
- , h. .6. ,Y'.9,, .. .Oy$. .;-'. %<f*"
8$,.c%,.t i
M .. -
[To accompany H.R. 39S2]
EfUrff.,Qp.(r<
- ' y' .
' i. 4.',.l$.*s.G
&.). .'gsa..m
- V r .. tg%'; 4&W. Ny,b
- C. . .p{ .a,.. *s.sy >-.2.*
'p,p , @ v.
' -sv . .
K y*...
L'Atw&..rf:yg.%p.A*:r-d' . .L..-
5'f-E#'e- *
%jWWy-d5(: ~.'sL, 9 . ~ ~~ C;,W.*'
. %~Q* .V ', s .y-U -
c/ '
.1. r . . ~.'4 J %.*
f.
m.W.i' '2 - .. eh,oA e ~;
a , - .. ?.' .s..
. .Ji;"*
- , '.: r:,-} .: e
- s. ,.f@8 -=+g -
- ? - .
- s c?%~ .- w:;.,. *. $.sf-.,.
5 ..
.m g.,*g,n,;c.,y , ~a..: a n,
n __
~ -
._':..e .
M~
- m. - . ..
.lm 29. ISSI.-Ordered to be printed p
C
%c-4 P r :
L-**I-Qg. . p - .z n. . .-- - i e
Iq Mp.::S..',k-
--434: e-U.S. GOVERNMENT l'RINTING OFFICC W"J..'
' -~% .; . ,
- 4. - . .., . . , -
R2-376 0 WA SHINGTON : 1981
. , ; .f,. ., -y. " .-
M. mt.(;h.g: . . Ef5;I.4'S Mm.n,%m.. ...s' J '
. ,. ~. . . .
- v.?.:
- s. -h *g:. . ,
,~sfW .
ibp.hb.4*,
- .3 .
- y. .. ~ . ,. *Q *. . . ~
- - um. .g ., -
5 %_ , d, _ 4T* d. $. v. -
~ . *' j baun _. -- , _ e_ %
._ . i. - _ - - = . -
'R _._
- m. . -
rJ_ _ _ - -- - -____ __ _ __ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - LT = a _wo
[ ,.
7.~~ ,
o O~ -
. C0WeFooCE M ORT .! .,
827 .4 shared repowering pro-expedite release of the uccma rission au -
c,
- uthorized for ,appropri-
' ~ ' '
Operating expenses .,
partment is directed t _
.n solar hybrid electric Conventional reactor systems.-The agreement rovided $38h1 for '
high temperature reactor technology for establis ment of a HTGR E
- r. no funds are autho,r-l lead plant project including the development of materials and com- '
)u 1 cos s dur ng h pon,ents as described in the House report, and for continued inter-Senate Conferees are national cooperation. .
Departmental project Breeder reactor systems.-The Clinch River Breeder Reactor roj-Jese should be complet- ect is funded at $228 million. This technology demonstration pfant, J.:
ommittees of Congress as set forth*in the existing project arrangements, is a key ste in -
, the development of the Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor. hhe " -
the Wind Energy S s- e nfems in, tend that the plant should,be constructed in a tim,ely ..
cals of Public Law [6- 8.nd expeditious manner, so that a decision on the commerczaliza- .:.
t.h,e need for the,finan- tion and deployment of breeder reactors can be made on the basis .*
the of information obtained in the operation of the~ plant. The plant c t uatio o{ should therefore be constructed on the basis of that objective, and I ent that cost-sharing of n t on the basis of providmg needed power in the specific region of the Clinch River site. . . c. .-
- f th.a two conpactors Water-cooled breeder.-Fundin for the Water-Cooled Breeder Re- m
!h c ctor Ty actor program is reduced by $13fi and further the DOE is directed on vertical to remove the LWBR core m fiscal year 1983 to assure an orderly llogy of activithor base the pro- termination of the Shippingport subprogram by the end of that fiscal year so that the private sector can make a decision on com- 1 3 to terminate the Fed-
' mercialization of tnis approach. .
P
- Fuel e ele R&D.-In view of the need for LWR reprocessing tech- *
"0I EY 8M was added to the request to' carry out the program out-
'$e OTEY of [25M ing' ram O
horization - Imed in' *the House report. The breeder fuel cycle pr,ogram is fu:nded and S700,000 in capital at the reques f Phase II design activ. program outim,t ed lev,el; m the House $4M isreport.
provided However, for thethe thorium Confereesfuel sug-recycle unds are not available gested that the Department provide an analysis of reprocessmg EC authorization is net R&D and techn, ology demonstration needs for all reactor types with led in Public Law 96- appropriate priorities for each and a program plan. This report lot plant Program O should be submitted to the House Committee on Science and Tech- .:
sa$ n logy and the Senate Committee on Ene - and Natural Re-md as many retains the non prohTEC sources by January 31,1982. The Conferees be eve that the Barn,-
~EC-1 to the State of well facihty offers a unique opportumty to conduct RD&D in irradi- .
ting the Seacoast Test ated fuel reprocessing and recommend $10M for contir.ued R&D of which no more than $6M shall be utilized for R&D and testing at Barnwell. 3 Three Mile Island.-None of the furids authorized for research ,
included for the Raft and development activities under this Act may be used for releas-
-eothermal demonstra. -
Ing any radioactively contaminated water from the Three Mile Island nudear. station reactor no. 2 into the Susquehanna River or .
new budget authority its watershed. ;'
hermal demonstration C pital Equipment.-A total of $53.3M is authorized which in-to the prcject in fisca3 cludes S2M for the HTGR subprogram.
mds deferred in fiscal .C nstruction.-Additional authorization of $17.8M above the Ad- Y
- ministration fiscal year 19S2 request is provided for Project 78--6-F. 'I This additional amount was the level requested in the fiscal year 1951 supplemental request. The action of the Conference is to offset r" the additional authority request by amounts deferred into Escal -
.vear,1982 for the Energy Supply R&D PACE (Plant and Capital '
Equipment) account.
3- .u. . ,_ . ~
W[ .
Y<.
),Q=lp.=yw ? -
.- ..~.n.-
-.us caq
. . . m ,,, . : . .
gn r . . ~, = s e . s ** ~ * *
- Q .*** W f.- ****~*"~
- ~~~~J=
f*Cs. % : 4-::sdr d'
+w_... _ _ , . _ . -
i.n.?.W2.5% %%%: .x-. -
r w.a.1'~ M- m m:.= M *
-.m.-
n . x c.,,- c .- ~ . m -~ ~-
" ~
<=_ ""-
73
, t-L 00 DEMTE -
C C hWe-flLNC.E VEPO G-T
~
?J - uly 31,1981 . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SE , H 5817 r
. -Jt. The conferees have endorsed the ad- and the ISX-C experiment which were enhanced , remedial action activity
. Ib. E ministration's budget request provid. not included in the President's re- -cannot all be accommodated within a ing modest real growth in such DOE quest. modest cap which.only includes infla-
.,ar 2
- programs as basic energy sciences, un!- n.rcraze zxrmov systrus axn Extacy _.. tionary projections. , .. . , ,; _ . m.
.i versity research support, high energy . . . . ,
sToRAcE ._ ..., },}g (gym 3 gf my priggry jggggggt [n l 3, and nuclear physics, and life science Electric energy systems and energy the nuclear area I hope the pasage of
- y,r
~
and nuclear rnedicine applications. storage systems programs were funded this conference report coupled with Cf The authorization of these programs at levels to support responsible DOE the recent vote on the appropriations 9 contains funding for the operation and programs while $2 million was pro- b!H will put the issue of the Clinch -
construction of some of the world's vided to sustain continuing Federal in- River reactor to rest. The conferees *
$ @% best research facilities. volvement' in small scale hydropower intent is clear on this project, that the I wish to point out that the confer-
.n ! R. & D- - -
- DOE should move ahead with an de- .
ees adopted the Senate authorization Mr. JONES of Oklahoma. Air. liberate speed and I trust the adminis-g to j [ figure of $21 million for. project 78 Speaker I yield 1 minute to the gen- tration will obtain the cooperation of
.g b. Intersecting Storage Accelerator, tiewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Bou- other agencies in seeing that constue.
(ISABFT.T.R) at Brookhaven National
- 11
- n. s,H 9 1.abcratory. This additional project QUARD).,BOUQUARD (Mrs. asked and was tjDn .Will go .& head atp a._dwmmt.,
pace, .,g g m y . ., , .
at iiS authorization willfor.
meet theyear adminis-1982given permission to revise,and extend.., .~- There'are several points of clarifica-'
! tration's request fiscal her regiarks.) . . . . . . . . . .
- 2 '
budget authority of $21 million. - ~Mrs; BOUQUARD.7Mr.*SpeakeriI . tion that I'wguld he to make e ' .
Although I strongly support the am very pleased that tkGs conference regard to 'the conferees language on 1
3-high energy physics program for con- report contains the first Department the,Cunch R1,ver. breeder reactor. As .
struction of advanced research facili- of Energy authorization ' blu .since the primary authortof this particular ;
ties. I am personally concerned about Public Law 95-238 which contained language.1 would like to note that the
~
1 continuing as yet unresolved difficul- the fiscal year 1978 authorization. I h ..
-.[ ]g ties associated with the fabrication of have had some concerns about the im- n ermin, c
- the superconducting magnets for the plementation of the reconciliation 1.he conf mese..~...,.y. ,q .; -e ,. s., . ...
. ~. . ..~,, g y,,
ISABEIJ E facility. Thus, I expect the process, but the f act that it forced us y _The v70rds "as set forth'in the exist-
'# Department to continue its thorough to a speedy agreement on the DOE bill ing prbject.arrangementR*_ reflect the evaluation of the technical and man- is a definite phis for the process. I intention .of the conferees -to affirm agement situation for ISABELLE in wish to congratulate Chairman Joxzs, the existing project authorization, ob-i= order to resolve the difficulties during Chairman . FUGUA, and my fellow jectives, and major' desi,gn CoDCepts .
T the next several months and to advise House conferees on the R. & D. bid as and parameters which are intended to J y the Committee on Science and Tech- well as Senate majority and minority form the basis for liceminn construc- ,
3 nology on actions taken and future conferees for lending such positive tion..and operation of..the facility;at
, plans. -- ; - . ..
. support to the conference process. I .the exispng Clinch River s.ite.QIf.,,
'4 After a review of the project status also appreciate the cooperation of' , .The word '" key" .hi lhe sagne 11rst " ,
a * 'and revised costs during fiscal year Chairmen UDAL:. and DmctLI. In work. sentence was intended to affirm that i 4' 1982, the Comittee on Science and ing out matters of joint jurisdiction in this technology ' demonstration-scale
- I Technology wiu consider further au- such an amicable fashion with our Sci. faculty is of basic importance to the N thorization for'ISABETLE as part of ence Committee. . .. r: , m.,' . national program for the develepment
,-t gi the fiscal year 1983 authorization leg- Mr. Speaker, the statement of man. of liquid metal' fast" breeder reactors', -
slation required for prior year civilian agers language accompanying the bill .even though',ittis"'not a commercial I
..f R.& Dl projects. . .. speaks for itself and the tables con. demonstrationi'The conferees' choice 3
.wcetr.Am rrssrow tained .With the report languase pro. of the words'rtimely" and "exped!-
I 1 The Conferees authorized the Nucle- vide detailed direction to the Depart; tious" were purposely chosen with the
- { y ar Fission R. & D. programs at just $4 ment of Energy. Prom that perspec. intent that licensing, construction, and y million below the Reagan request and tive. I shall confine my remarks to other. related project ' activities be un-
' d provided 'for a committee initiative in highlighting areas of particular inter. dertaken promptly.,and:with as little 7 the high temperature gas-cooled reac- est to members of the Energy Re . delay as discretion will, allow.'In the y tor (HTGR) program. The conference search and Production Subcommittee same sentence the phrase "so that a .
1 report calls for redirection in reproc- which I chair and some other specific decision on commercialization and de ~
- Q} 3 essing R. & D. to light water reactors, programmatic items which are of par. ployment of. breeder reactors man be
,3 g provides a final year of funding for ticular interest to me. . . . . .made on the , basis of.information ob-7 g the Barnwell facility and provides for -I do have some reservations about tained in the operation .cf the plant" a strong' program across the nuclear the adoption of out year authorization in ~ conjunction , with ' the '..worcs.
~
tt
=
p
- fuel cycle. Significant reductions were caps for fiscal years 1983 and 1984 if " timely"[ and f." expeditious" . Ineans called for in the water cooled breeder they are to be used as a disincentive to that the effect of unrecoverable delays 3
, program, which is to be brought to an obtaining authorization bills in the resulting from' the 1977 decision to orderly termination, and in Civilian Congress for those fiscal years. I share stop the project should be *Med
- - Waste Management where the confer- Chairman FUQUA's and Chairman and that to the maximum extent pos-W ees saw the need for a more focused UDALI.'s concerns that the area of com. sible the overall ~11guld metal ifast i program. In other fission programs, mercial waste management which is breeder reactor program should pro-j funds are provided for the West Valley largely a civilian waste management ceed in accordance with the pre-April .
ig Demonstration Project and certain. R. & D. program under the sole juris. 1977 project' schedule. ~ . " . , , .
- _ 2 waste management activities. diction of the Science Committee and ' The' next ' sentence 7 the plant
'E y MACNTTIC TUsroN . a' remedial action prograrn with no R. should therefore be constructeti on 4 The conference report provides & D. component which is of primary the basis of that oojective, and not on 4 5473.500.000 in new budget authority interest to the Interior Committee the basis of providing needed power in j for the magnetic fusion program in ad- may pose a significant problem in a specific region of the Clinch River 3 dition to $15 million of fiscal year 1981 terms of funding priorities. The con- site", is simply intended to reaffirm i construction deferrals. The conferees ferees recognize that the West Valley that all activities associated with the F
g emphasized the importance of moving demonstration project which is also an construction of the facility including forward with the Center for Fusion element of this program will be requir- the design, licensing, construction, and g
- 1 Engineering which was provided an ing significant outyear funding and operation be undertaken with the un.
I additional 55 million. Additional funds this combined with significant growth derstanding that the objective in were also provided for the Fusion Ma- in the technology demonstration building this plant is to provide infor-i l 4 terials Test Facility (formerly FMIT.' phase of the R. & D. program and an mation and experience in a demonstra-h M
- q ; . - .
.- ^ :. g. g
- * .g y, y\
,'e** e ' ;. ;s 5 . . . .
.K. ; ,- . ..; g. _:, , t Q 3. v g,... ;
- - - .-n'- - ,
E
'H 5818 'CONGRESSIONAI. RECORD lHO .
this' ' wide' p~o'llef.f hh31,1881 h(
ld iact, we may be tion scale. All other benefits 'ars inci so-called ' fusion ; enginee'r'ik device i 4 dental including the provision of elec. (FED). I hope that the CFE can serve enlled-upon to make'even more and .]
-tric energy to the region surrounding astrial a core group for in involvement a widening this decade. indus- Thedeeper present cuts in.those 2 years; projection's. below our This ccncern for
. the Clinch River f acility.+ %. -w
' -Before turning to the specifics of my conference agreement also supports evenimore diligent efforts in these out ;
subcommittee's programs, let me ob- funding for the impurities study ISX- years repressnts the reason why our .+
serve that I am pleased with the bal- C experiment at Oak Ridge which is four Republican. members of the Sci- k ance struck in conference for solar and vital to technology for a fusion ' ' "* power not ence sign theand. Technology Com:d.
subconfefence report teeon did .
conservation R. & D. prc; rams. SolarIn reactor.
electricwM : energy systems I' and R. & D. is $110 million above the energy storage ' systems, the confer . theDepartment of Energy. ~c..Th -
Reagan request and I do not but agree I doence agreement maintains a meaning- mary issue for 11r. GOt.DWAMR, hir.
with all the specific priorities, feel that this program represents a ful Federal role in these programs FIsn. Mr.'LUJaN,' and myself 1.as been 3 much more balanced approach to the where the United States has unfortu- mMnNMnithe T. proposed level of 4 Federal role in solar energy than what nately lost international preeminence spending' from'the administration. In '5.7' In the adminktration requested. In con- within the past decade. I . hope..tbat March, all'17,Ite6ub11can members of "
servation R. & D. there has also been the administration recognizes that the Scien'c's's' rid' Technology Commit- .f -
a very significant add-on roughly dou- these ate areas where we have over- itee . signed a'.letteilgreeing that this'g- 4 bling the Reagan request. I am pleast 4 whelming evidence. industry simply was our most impdrtant objective. By that the key industrial and transporta- will not pick up the ball.
- T ' y ' :, .- the tims the" committee had finished .M tion R. & D. programs were given new l Finally, the confernece ' agreement
$1 million to retain. Federal its budgeiwork on the Departmenth'tof
' life by the conference. It is also worth provides noting that these add-ons are general . activity in low head hydro R. & D. be Energy, thFintirsicommutee ns in '
agreement dith this goal,ind we held M" ly supported by the Appropriations cause of the great potential of this dis! "our spending ~~) levels'-below 'those re- -S Committee in tne House. Finally, in tributed resource. .r ';; t Mrquested by the adminim a tion. Both the programs outside our subcommit- ; Mr. Speaker, I support the confer- Ethe commidee $D1.to authorize DOE E tee I should note that the conference ence agreement tmder title X because and f.he.Winn subs _titute for the DOE 3 ~
supports the request for the high tem- it provides a reasonable balance for authorizations were,below the Reagan .'. l perature materials lab at Oak Ridge in energy R. & D. programs and I hope the basic energy sciences budget. The the Office of Management and Budget
-+c -h
" mMmmintration 8 requests. n "'bco initiation of this facility to house a will recognize that the conferees are h te g y 1] -
matenals " center-of-exceUence has serious about. continuing these vital e nferees had accepted a Senate offer .g ,i already drawn significant industrial programs. Any deliberate delay 'in ~
support.
committing funds in these areas where to provide for cutyear authorizatio in the nuclear pr'ograms the confer- the Congress has spoken so clearly will in this offer was san agreement to .
ence agreement anows for a strong nu- have to be construed as a violation cf exceed ' the ; Reagan sdrninistration's -
clear fission R. & D. program while the intent of the Budget Impound- projected budgets for the Department .
supporting major committee initia- ment and Control Act and I trust the of Energy by $600 to $700 Jtinic.n in -
tives with respect to the high tempera- appropriate committees will act ac- both fiscal years;1983 and 1984. As R ture gas cooled reactor (HTGR) and cordingly. " ' " ' ' - - ' " d M ". w Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker,'I yield 5 strong supporters of the Fresident's [
the Barnwell nuclear fuels plant. The economic recovery plan we cannot sup- . -
committee was cominced after careful minutes to the gentleman from port this action.~.With]these outyear
" * - a study that the DOE TM1 R. & D. pro- Kansas (Mr. WINN). .
authorizations in place.-we have no as- q gram was well conceived and constitut- (Mr. WINN asked and was'giveri Ee'r; surarce that we could pass further a ed a proper Government role. The mission to revise and extend his .7- C re- anrmal authorization bills . in those y conference did provide additional marks.) Mr. WINN. Mr. Speaker,* I- rise"iri - fiscal years to reduce thesefeel outyear < i funds for light water reactor reproc- that essing R. & D. while sustaining the ' strong support .of the confererice this {authorizationicellings.NWe(Appropri would be giving the' ey Reagan request in other fuel cycle report for the omnibus reconciliation ations Committee no guidance, and es- 1 programs. -
bill, H.R. 3982. AD of my colleagues sentiaDy a free hand in funding DOE T I should note that the ' major reduc- are to be congratulated on the amaz- programs. It also undermines and re- .3 tions f or nuclear fission in the confer- ing legislative feat they- have per- verses aU of;the work that we have g ence. agreement are in civilian waste formed in putting this reconculation done this year to try to accomplish the 3 management and the. water-cooled budget package together. Without the goal of spending only' at,Jh,e Reagan- v
-breeder reactor prograrri. The confer- wholehearted cooperation of Chair- Q-- - --
ees agreed with our committee that man JoNrs, Chairman DourNrcI, Rep. requested I want to niake levelst, c Iear'that I lia the civilian waste management pro- resentative LATTA, and Senator Hor.I gram is not satisfactorily focused (O INos. In addition to the score of confer.ment Quarrelf or with fiscalthe'.yearconference agree ' 3 1982. It represents I
support the test and evaluation facill- ees, this conference report could not ty which is our committee priority. As have been done as quickly as it has. a fine compromise on the Department 4 l for the water-cooled breeder there is Starting with our first subconference of Energy budget. I want to commend d, general agreement that the program meeting on July 15. the Members and Chairman PUQUA for his strong efforts J should be brought to an orderly termi- staff have worked diligently to fashion in behalf of the subconferencei and to 3 nation to encourage the private sector this compromise agreement in less congratulate him 'for reaching this =
to make a decision with respect to than 2 weeks. By comparison, the con. compromise , for fiscal -year 1982. 3 ference on the Energy Security Act re. Where the conferees decided to take W commercializing this concept.
In magnetic' fusion the conference quired 7 months to complete its ac. 1982newforpolicy research directions in fiscal year"i i and defelopment, l
i agreement provides for an enhanced tions. -
they simultaneously sought out redue- !
I program above the Reagan request This bill represents a good beginning &
principally to support a broadened ac- toward our goal of a balanced budget tions in other areas where priorities tivity for the Center for Fusion Engi- in 1984. But I warn my colleagues that were less. The result is that we exceed- 5 neering (CFE) and to sustain vital we cannot let up on our objective. Our ed the requested energy research andIi R. & D. on the Mike McCormack new-found concensus, that the Federal. development budget by only 2 percent. I Fusion Materials Test Pacility. In the Government's budget must be brought Finally, I wish to warn my fenow 2
case of the CFE it is worth noting that under control. cannot be an agreement colletgues of what may appear to be this entity must be organized well in just for fiscal year 1982. We must con- savit.gs, but represents inflex!ble ac- i advance of any DOE decision with re- tinue to work diligently in itscal year counting principles. As I said at the 3 spect to the next large machine, the 1983 and fiscal year 1984 to maintain time of the passage of the Winn sub- 4. s 5'
3 i;
- ~ ,,, _ . . _ . . . _ . .
Q.
~ .
- ' - ;, S 8998 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD---SFJ.m. _
July 31,19s1 ~23,t ce against the our Throughout the reconcination process YM.
our Nation w h a r, cal has been to direct Federaling enI. car.
nouncementearner.*Ibisis provide at this time. . the best g3- read-economic dislo atic .s. protection against The conferees on .the tax bH1 are in w in.ernational e .b? goes, and a source of ergy and natural resource programs to fuel for miutary in the event of war- release the creativity and individualini- conference at this moment. As soon aswe
' tlative of the American people to sus- fmith the rec 6ncHistion conference re- -y;h c-time mobnizauen. economic growth.* A G ;. . - port tbls af ternoon, it would be my inten- ) .&
The strategic petroleum reserve was tain Mr.DOMINICL Mr. President.Iwould tion to deal with routine matters on the .T.
created by the Energy PoHey and Con. calendars as they may. be available by _
servation Act, Pubuc 14w.94-163, and like to ask the distinguished chairman w- : .. :gm.
signed into law on December 22, 1975. of the Committee on Energy and Natural unanimous consent?/ J - ~ . . o .
After we have disposed of those mat- 7--
Motivated by concern for national se- Resources intent of the forconference some clariacation committees initheac ~ ~ ters,it would be my intention to ask the $
curity, the objective of the strategic pe- tions with regard to the Clinch River Senate to recess over until 8 p.m. By that D-troleum vulnerabnity reserve is to reduce to severe the U.S.of Breeder Reactor. Am I correct that the time it is hoped the conferees on the tax. N-interruptions petroleum supplies through the acquisi. Statement of Managers a2!rms the need h31 notcan theygive us aangood r* Vine onMwhether ?.
tion and storage of up to 1 biulon bar. for and Hming of the project, and con- or win have early conference report to be Sled, perhaps on. tomorrow. M.
rels of petroleum. .
templates that canstruction be under Once again,in the context of the Om- taken as expeditiously as possibit If that is likely, and if the mechanical :.Q nibus ReconcDiation Act of 1981, the Mr. McCLURE. The Senator'is correct' requirements of producing that report . ,i .E -
Cong:ess expresses its concern that the Mr.DOMENICL Am I correct that the ' for submission can be accomplished, I W.
Nation estabush and maintain an ade- Statement of Managers reSects the in- win consider =*ing the Senate to con- IC quate supply of stored oil to min"nhe tention to .afirm the existing project vene at a late hour on Saturday, perhaps. . -
authorization includmg location of the' - 6 o' clock, to consider that conference did re-; $g the adverse eSects of any serious inter-project at the existing Clinch . River port at that time; .sw.s W t N..,o . .$-
~
ruption in petroleum supplies, Tne conference agreement creates an site? JAnd.am I also correct that the I reiterate that is not clear at this' M off budget funding mechankm for the Statement of Managers a !rms the exist - point. But if it is, then it is,-perhaps Y'
- Secretary of Energy with an authoriza- ing project arrangements and objec- p=*hle report
.we could hkh the conference on the tax biU by tomorrow night. ,
tien of $3.9 b1Hion for fiscal year 1982, tives which were incorporated into.the. Ethink it smitirely,cin aH for oil acquisition. transportation injec- existing project authorization? w.g tion, and expenses associated with draw- Mr. McCLURE. The Senator is correct cannot, then it is my intention to_ask us g-to cane back .next week.I hope just .m in down the reserve in response to an on both points. . . .
energy emergency. .
'Mr.DOMENICL Am I correct that the for 1 day, on Tuesday or Wednesday- .f;;W In addition, on budget authorizations project win be judged on the basis of its Wednesday seems the more favored day W are provided to cover the cost of ability 'to meet the. existing informa- based on the conversations I have had. JQ
- construction, operation-including the tional objectives and not on the . basis with . In Members on both recapitulation; Mr. sides so far.we.
. President, ;;4. Jh. ;
drawdown system-maintenance. pro- c! providing needed power? , ,
gram direction, and administration in will finish the reconcination conference y Mr. McCLURE. You are correct.-F the amounts of $260 million ior ascal Mr. DOMENICL Am I correct that the' report, we will attend 'to housekeeping ;.y.-
year 1982, $366 minion for fiscal year intent of the conferees is to W+% detans, unefmous-consent -items on .
1985, and $364 miluon for fiscal year the e:Iect of unrecoverable delays re- bot 11 calendars as they am.availaW this @,,
1984. .
afternoon;.We will recess at that point sdting from the 1977 decision to stcp untD 8 Welock to receive a progress re- b Tne initial storage target was 500 mil- the project, and to that end, affirms port rom the confereeseon the tax bill. ..A lion barrels by 1982. The Congress sub- the existing project arrangements and e, shortly after. 8 o' clock, T {A "4g sequently aproved the implementat40n objectives, and to the maximum extent A in t at are a of barrels a Government reserve ofapproval with congressional 'l50 minion possible, the ' pre-April r1977~ ' project.- .and be able to state whether on schedule? -
er announcement it.wiU be. ; g%
necessary the timing and method for the fourth 250-million barrel increment being league from liew Mext o t thei Mr. McCLURE. Let t l' choose what day, if it is necessary, to g in on' Saturday, and to 9 deferred. . .
%r t, compW.me c.on@ence, npo4. next-'
Mr R'~IE"GLE~. Mr. P' resident,"wil Consistent with these. earlier policies rect'on this point also
- y. dom'ICI. b. - '. M en~t,I'"I ***k". ~ "
C ~ " ' M W the conference agreement requires the ask the distinguished junior Senator Senator yield for sJquestion? .h., > ~.. A W
President to seek a fin rate for the re- from Washington Gir. GoRToN) if he is Mr. BAKER. Yes, I yield. - U .N.O AF serve of at least 300.000 barrels per day. ready. I yield to the Senator from .Mr. RIEGLE. Is it the intention' of W However, because the ultimate size under present polier was approved during a ACENDA "* 28DU* - the Sena*.or if we go through and over Wj.
FC3 mt gNE rom mg EIMArNDER to Dext week and come in either Tues-period when U.S. import of oil was sub-stantiaur creater than it is at present, the conference agreement also requires P " 3 " " "D MEIT N day or Wednesday, would it be the Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, before the thought that the only matter to arise i4.
the Department of Energy to reevaluate Senator fro:n Washington begins. would wot1d be the vote on the tax conference W the optimal ultimate size of the reserve he anow me to intervene? I ask unan!- report? f ~ % , , .Z. J".',3. - ,. , , . '.$
in a report to the Congress. mous consent that I may proceed in col- Mr. BAKER. Yes. ~. 1" 7 *q In summary, the conference agree. loquy with the distinguished minority Mr. RIEGLE. There would be no other .1 ment achieves savings of of s6.509 million leader without any time being charged items? ,. ..._.,gg. , , . . , ..
5 for ascal year 1982; $5,153 million for on the reconciliation conference report. Mr. BAKER..'I 'can assure Senators N.
fiscal year 1983: and $4.607 m!Ulon for The PRESIDDiG OFFICER. Without that based on the remarks I made yes- .Ys fiscal year 1984 for programs within the objection. it is so ordered. tarday this is the only business of any ..f jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I thank the meaning the only business except by f3 consequence we are going 2 trmut, and Natural Resources. 0
- L. President, throuchout this proc - distinguished Senator from Washington' unanimous-consent items. C :.
I have asked the distinguished ma-ess it has been my .iudgment that it Mr. RIEGLE I thnnk the Senator. -
would be possible to ultimately fashion jorit/ leader if he would at this time ten Mr. JACKSON. Mr. President, win the ,y',3 a budret packnRe chenees that would us what the business of the Senate win ,:
achieve the goals and obiectives of Pres- be for the rest cf the day, what the pro. majority leader yield? ,
ident Rencan's crocram for economie re- gram will be for the rest of the week. - Mr. B AKER. Yes. -<~
4 covery. althoueh not necessarily an iden, and what the program win be for the Mr. JACKSON. Under the rules woilld "
tical nackaRe. This has proven to be the early part of next week if it is necessary the Senate take up the conference re- i case. Some of the recu! red changes have to return. port first, the conference report on the
~~1 been calnful and we therefore have at- Mr. BAKER. Mr. President,' I thank tax.b!II?
tempted to assure enuitv in the distribu- the minority leader. I must say the situ- Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I ihenk k tion of consequencies of the necessary ation is not even clear now at 4 :40 in the the Seantor for inquiring. I was under $
change, afternosn. I had hoped to make'an an- the impression that since we asked for a 7
. I'd
.~
t
.J
p3y 9
h,, C (j s s
18.
SECRETARIAT RECORD COPY FEB 1 1 1982 ,
The lionorable Dan Quayle _
United States Senate l'ashington, D.C. 20510 * ,
Dear Senator Quayle:
Thank you for your letter dated February 5,1982, concerning the Department of Energy's (DOE) request for an exemption from certain Ccmission regulations for the Clinch River Breeder Reactor.
On December 24, 1981, procedures it will be following for considering the merits of DOE's r for an exemption to pemit them to undertake certain site preparation activities prior to the issuance of a construction pemit or limited work authorization by the fluclear Regulatory Commission.
would pemit a Cocaission decision by early !* arch on this request.The schedule establis
~
The Commission appreciates receiving your etncents with respect to this request and will include then as part of the record of the proceeding.
Sincerely,
.Cariton P erer
- Carlton !'annerer, Director Office of Congressional Affairs *
Enclosure:
'7" As sta.ted ,,e O
e e
h b
<d
.,' DAN QUAYL , cow.arrvraa.
. treD1 h '"D AMMCD SERVICES 154 Rus: ELL Crauft Orr,cr svetassee E '-
"""*"" " " " ^ ' * " ~ ~ " * * ' " "
9JCnifeb Siafes Senafe
,,,,/,7,~C d" ',,,,m . WASHINGTON. D.C., 20510 , ,
leeuemeen.rs, feeusen 46104 February 5, 1982' The Honorable Nunzio J. Palladino Chairman Nuclear Regulatory Commission h'ashington , D. C. 20555 Daar Mr. Palladino:
Late last year the Department of Energy asked.the Nuclear P.egula-tory Commission for exemptions from established regulatory procedures for the purpose of allowing preliminary site work on the Clinch River breeder reactor p'roject. Such work would be allowed prior to completion.
of the project's environmental impact statement. I do not believe such exemptions fulfill Congressional intent in authorizing the proj ect, nor do I believe they would. benefit the entire breeder reactor program.
The legislative history of the Clinch River project clearly shows that a major goal of this proj ect is to demonstrate the licensability '
of the liquid metal fast breeder reactor. Any deviation.:from licensing procedures established by NRC would obviate this.purp,ose and deprive the nuclear industry of the clear precedents needed to proceed with additional LMFBR plants.
I 5elieve the.best way to ass'ure'a stabl.e future for the. nation's nuclear industry, which represents a v. ital.part of our present and future energy supply structure, is to stabilize and clarify the regu-latory environment. Exempting demonstration . plants from normal regu-latory requirements- can only delay" progress toward meeting this goal. - .
It will also retard the progress o.f proving new technology. For i these reasons, tnerefore, I'reques't at you deny DOE's request for l exemptions.
.l' neer ,
. e. ..
l .
., ay1e -
'- .- U S. Senator DQ:td ,
sp p t c l
l i
o t
o ,
9 mxs19GwcL o .
! /2
) -
SECRETARIAT RECO i
FEB t i gggg The Honorable. Alan Dixon United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510 -
Dear Senator Dixon:
Thank you for your letter dated January 27, 1982, on behalf of your constituent, Ernest Cheslow, concerning the Department of Energy's (DOE) request for an exemption from certain Co mission regulations for the Clinch River Breeder Reactor.
On December 24, 1981, the Comission issued the enclosed order outlining the procedures it will be following for considering the nierits of DOE's request for an exemption to permit them to undertake certain site preparation activities prior to the issuance of a construction permit or. limited work authorization by the fluclear Regulatory Comission.- The schedule established would permit a Cocnission decision by early l'. arch on this request.
The Comission appreciates receiving Mr. Cheslow's comments with respect to this request and will include them as part of the record of the proceeding.
Sincerely,
.Carit on Ka= merer A~ Carlton Kamerer, Director '
m-
,,,, Office of Congressional Affairs '
.;g
. .]
- - u -
Enclosure:
As stated
..; i-G
^ "
- e- e , - - _ ,%e..-
J1 f
fY
fcw ,~ "IQ&RQOwcq
~
() .O e +
L%
January 27, 1982 v
'ECnileb States Senalc RE: Ernest Cheslow '
1154 Carol Lane Cencoe, Illinois 60022 Respectfully referred to:
Congressional Liaison Office Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 4
Eecause of the desire of this office to be responsive te all inquirics and cennunications, your censideration of the attached is requested. Your findings and viers, in _. ,. _
duplicate for=, along with return of the i enclosure, will be appreciated by i
(
I Alan J. Dixon U.S.S. ,
~
?. ..
Forn #2
- u. . c.:2-mr/ajh l
=
l t
? s h 9D V l
r -
i GO' \\ $S i
O b
1 s ERNcST CHESLoW l 1,
m 7
(}
n54 CAROL LANE occNcoc. LuNol5 Coo 22 b f
, January 12, 1982 l
. Secretary of the Commission Bei Docket.#50-537 l, Nuclear Regulatory Commission exemption request 8 Washington, D.C. 20555 under lo CFa 50.12 ;
Gentlemen ;
When considering the proposed exemption of the Clinch River Reactor from standard licensing procedures, please j take into account that such procedures were adopted by -
the NRC and its predecessor to assure the public that at-least minimum safety standards have been complied Ltth before a nuclear power. plant can be built and operated. '
Many of us believe that those safety standards are too l laz, but at least they are there. !
g-To exempt an installation from standard licensing '
procedures can be justified only
- 1. In the event of the direst nattnal emergency, or i 2 If the installation is recognized as so safe that i the usual precautions are unnecessary.
Neither of these conditions exists with respect to the I Clinch River installation.
i
,First, there is no emergency of any kind with respect to the operation of. a breeder reactor. When Clinch River .
was first planned, it was contemplated that hundreds of ,
water-cooled reactors would be built and that uranium would be in. short supply. What has happened since then is that new reactors are not being built and that there is more than enough uranium to meet _ foreseeable needs. ,
Secondly, and.even more importantly, the safety record of liquid metal fast' breeder" reactors in this country has been abysmal. One experimental breeder (ES3-II) .
and one demonstrati.on commercial breeder (Enrico Fermi) have suffered' meltdowns and come close to explosion. ,
i Surely this justifies - in fact, demands stronger pre-caution s , rather tha4n a relaration.
If the people of Tennessec ever have reason to re5 ret their present enthusiasm for the Clinch River insta11atipn, you would not want it on your consciences that the NBC did less than it could have done.
Sincerely, CC: Sens. Howard Baker, Charles Percy, Islan Dixon Reps. John Porter, Toby Moffett, Richard Ottinser, Edward Markey N.I.R.S.
1 1 0 2 i S O 'a 'Y -
M;'."R:=w w. - . am -
j,'kNhYYId Y ,$$ksse rism%dlyE 1@MR.%= vie 4'.nE!!k?!?5?_
M M 2 m e m a$lf3N ~S^ EON 9MhYN[M'e$ YU
'~
[/ /\,
t
} ,
1 0.
~
RMTAT RECORD C FEB 11 1982 The Honorable Jin Sasser ,
'Jnited States Senate
- ashington, D.C. 20510 Dea ~r Senator Sasser:
Thank ycu for your letter dated January 26, 1982, on behalf of your .
constituent, "is, rathleen Harkey, concerning the Decartment of Energy's (DOE) request for an exemption frco certain Commission regul6tions for the .
Clinch River Creeder Reactor. .
On Dece h r 24, 1901, the Ccnoission issued the enclosed order outlining the procedures it will be following' for considering the T.erits of DOE's request for an exemption to pemit them to undertake certain site preparation activities prior to the issuance of a construction pemit or limited work authorization by the fluclear Regulatory Ccmission. The schedule established would pemit a Ccmission decision by early March on this request. _
The Ccncission appreciates receiving its. Harkey's em:nents with respect to this request and will include then as part of the record 6f the proceeding.
Sincerely,
~
Carit en Ka= mere 2-Carlton hmerer, Director
. ; Office of Ccr.gressicr.a1 Affairs -
J-- ,. ~~'.
3- . . .
'5 ~ inciosure: * -
'f As stat 6d
_y.
-?; e f.?; ;q[ -
m-- ~..
E ..
JS
. - . _ .p .'
1
" ^ '
G>
r
)f g'
s
dwoe,.'ss w-s.- 1 bD - ($yck -
h d e ' ryl '
~
(d (d~
Arraoeauamems
- er GOVERNh8EMTA1. AFFAIRS 9JCm,ich Sfales Senate Sygg= o~
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20510 -
e, s January 26, 1982 Mr. William D'reks Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D.C. 20555
Dear Mr. Dircks:
Recently I was contacted by a constituent, Ms. Kathleen Harkey, regarding the granting of an exemption concerning the safety hearing process in the case of the Clinch River Breeder Reactor. A copy of that comunication is enclosed.
Any coments or information that you may be able to provide -
would be very much appreciated. -- -
Thank you for your time and attention.
,. ~ _
i Si cerely-ia Sasser United States Senator Enclosure
~
l ~
,1)V i 6 l
i .
<r g
~
b P
. .{ , , ,
.? . :. /-
o,e.
~t-:
o ._
'FF2CE
. Nas'.Ville -
CONSTITUENT OFINION 1
CCSFTITUEST N'-2'E 'ND ADDRESS .
1
[
Ms. Ka-hleen liarkey 225 Craighesi -
l Nashville, 37205 TELEPliONE NUI'IER:
~
OFFICE ( )
'^'
HOME ( )
ISSUE: Clinch River Breeder Reactor -
OPINION:
Es. Harkey works for Channel 8. She is 'very concerned over the possibility of waiving the firjal safety inspection of the Breeder Reactor.
S
' ~
e.
'i g e
ho Y cf >- a V p c acq 6'%
o V
.1 /
(#g#a90 Lp af ; A' yd
,- - g. -
- v. s p, s?
y L\
/
V,o
-V
+ /
y ,
L y 3" r P- , $5 ws %c4
- 5
,y .
H
.. .w
\ 3
[
TC p a-p
M'M "V V Lh V)
SECRETARlAT RECORD C
- 9. I.
FEB l t gggg s*- . .
The Honorable Paul Tsongas United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Senator Tsongas:
Thank you for your letter dated December 9,1981, concerning the Department of Energy's (DOE) request for an exemption from certain Cc=iis.sion regulations for the Clinch River Breeder Reactor.
On December 24, 1981, the Ccmission issued the enclosed oNer outlining the procedures it will be following for considering the merits of DOE's request for an exemption to pemit them to undertake certain site preparation activities prior to the issuance of a construction permit or limited work authorization by the f;uclear Regulatory Commission. The schedule established
. would pemit a Comission decision by early flarch on this reouest. ,
~
~
The Ccmission appreciates receiving your connents with r5 spec 5 to this request and will include them as part of the record of the proceeding.
Sincerely, ga: Mon Kametef Carl ton Yamnerer,, Director
~
Office of Congressional Affairs
Enclosure:
As st'ated 3 ?? '" -
Identical , letter sent.to:
l
- Sen. Gordon Humphrey 9- Sen. Dale Bumpers * - -
Sen. Bill Bradley Sen. Gary Hart N t
.e.
gy
. . eteeue V
?DM
, PAUL. T50N2A5 W p* M ~
bk O . !
m* 9)CnHeb Afafes Senate -
)
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20510
. December 9, 1981 The Honorable Nunzio J. Palladino Chairman ,
Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D.C. 20555
Dear Mr. Chairman:
~
It has come to our attention that the Department of Energy has asked the Nuclear Regulatory Comission for exemptions from established regula-tory procedures to allow site work to begin on the Clinch River breeder reac, tor before hearings on the project's environmental impact are complete.
We do not believe that it has ever been the intent of Congress to encour-age such exemptions, nor do .we believe that such exemptions 'are in the best interests of possible future commercial development of Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactors (LMFBRs).
The legislative and contractual history.of the Clinch River-project clearly state that one of the goals of this project is to demonstrate licensability of LMFBRs for comercial application. To exempt this pro-ject now would merely postpone this determination and.cause extensive delay and increased cost of any LMFBR plant that might follow. The time to clearly demonstrate LMFBR licensability is ~now.'
Public Law 91-273 authorized the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) to enter into a cooperative arrangement with 'a reactor manufacturer and .
Others for the development of a demonstration LMFBR -- the Clinch River project. The resulting contract, executed August 7,1972 by the AEC.
Tennessee Valley Autho-ity, Comonwealth Edison Company, and Project Management Corporation, stated that one of the principal objectives of this project vas:
"To help . . . verify certain key characteristics and capabilities of breeder power plants for operation on utility systems such as licensability and safety, operability, reliability, availability, maintainability, flexibility, and prospect.for economy."
This desire to verify the licensability of LMFBRs was reaffirmed by Congress in 1974 in Public Law 93-438, which stated that the NRC should have licensing and related regulatory authority over demonstration LMFBRs when operated as part of an electric utility systeni or in any other manner for the purpose of demonstrating their suitability for comercial application.
t J
IFf ()F i
g0h . .
1 ,q .
O O a.
Congress has never since indicated any support for regulatory exemp-tions for this project. The Conference Report accompanying the Omnibus Budget Reconciliat. ion Act of 1981,' cited by DOE in its request to the NFC for regulatory exemptions, in fact states: -
~
"The conferees intend that the plant should be constructed in a timely and expeditious manner, so that a decision on the comercialization and deployment of breeder reactors I
can be made on the basis of information obtained in the operation of the plant. The plant should therefore be constructed on the basis of that objective, and not on the basis of providing needed power in the specific region of the Clinch River site."
This report language is not a request for regulatory exemptions. To the contrary, it reaffirms the need to go through all steps of established regulatory procedure now to pave the way for possible future commercializa-tion We urge you to consider these points and deny DOE's request for exemptions. Thank you very much.
Sincerely, _. ._
dlM / Ch / - /
PAUL E. TSONGAS BILL BRADLEY ,-
fA fW 96 N J. SUMPHREY
/ -GARY HART dN DALE BUMPERS p 8 e
w a
( T\ W M k 3 \
t). b i SECRETARIAT RECORD C
- 2A rE8 1 l 1982 The Honorable !! orris Udall, Chairnan
Subc~ocnittee on Enercy and the Environnent Comittee on Interior and Insular Affairs Untied ' States House of Representatives 1!ashington, D.C. 20515
Dear tir. Chairaan:
Thank you for your letter dated December S,1981, concerning the Department of Energy's (DOE) request for an exemption from certain Comraission regulations for the Clinch River Breeder Reactor. .
On December 24, 1981, the Ccrr.ission issued the enclosed. order outlining the procedures it will be following for considering the terits of DOE's request for an exenption to permit them to undertake certain site preparation activities prior to the issuance of a construction perait or limited work .
authorization by the !!uclear Regulatory Conmission. The schedule established -
would pemit a Cocaission decision by early fiarch on this request. o The Ctr.maission appreciates receiving your reconmendations and comments with respect to this request and will consider them as part of the record of the proceeding.
Sincerely, Darltcn Ka:: vere, ,
.,3 Carl ton Varnerer, Director j'-
Office of Congressional Affairs
Enclosure:
As stated e
4 a "A ,
I D
j d
/ gov
wh.tevywrw comoxess ' y (,
a coe.m.ma coa.um
==_
<..: m _ ,...m .1 0 --
= = . _
""s YnuE
. caur. COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS ^=ocounsc6 E 7.U I..D.",,,,
,,,",",,,',;,****"",,",*g,*"*,, *^""^**""4",",, u.s. House or REPRESENTATIVES .
% Ts,s7. 4.es. . ,~.m',7. eaur. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20H5
".=',.",%"('llt'-
. Z;"." n." - u- - -so==sa.
"~ *""*: ""* .u.
- %' "/%'d"".. .
December 8, 1981
. ~"."'*"""i^ . %. "."':",.".a*
- T , .. ..
.o - - . . - - -
_c. ,
g g n g e-,.
'"m".'. "1".h.""".:.
%;.**"*.0;t. .
- u. *a.'."u*an"A .
The Honorable Nunzio Palladino Chairman, Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 -
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I have been informed that the Commission may vote tomorrow on a request by the Secretary of Energy that the Commission itse'lf use existing authority under 10 CFR Part 50.12 to decide whether or not to allow site preparation work to begin for the Clinch River Breeder Reactor (CRBR). Because the decision will establish a precedent and tone for future NRC licensing actions regarding '
the breeder react,or program, I would hope the Commission will resist pressures to act with undue haste on this matter. As chairman of the Committee with primary jurisdiction in the House over the nuclear regulatory process, I am concerned about the implications of the Commission's actions (pursuant to the Secretary's request) on the. siting and licensing of the CRBR.
Existing regulations (10 CFR Part 50.10). provide for a procedure whereby site preparation and excavation and certain other onsite activities could be undertaken prior to the issuance of a constructio'n permit for the CRBR. The purpose of this regulatory procedure is to lessen the impact of the licensing process on an applicant's construction schedule and expedite completion of the project.
The Secretary has determined, however, that this orderly procedure is inadequate in the case of the CRBR. He has requested, therefore, that the Commission provide the extraordinary regulatory-relief of granting an exemption (under 10 CFR Part 50.12) that would allow CRBR site preparation prior to and without fulfilling the requirements for issuance of a limited work authorization (LWA). To my knowledge, the Commission has not granted an exemption under 10 CFR Part 50.12 in a contested proceeding since
, the adoption of the LWA regula,tions in April 1974; a practice l
in keeping with the Commission policy of granting such exemptions sparingly and only in cases of undue hardship. .
Prior to a final decision on the Secretary's request, I hope the Commission will consider fully the adequacy of established LWA procedures to allow a timely commencement of CRBR site -
b-r d (04pk o< v -
[ r) ,
- ~~
' O O preparation while protecting the integrity of the licensing process and the rights of all parties to participate in the proceeding.
In addressing the Secretary's request that the Commission bypass the licensing board and decide itself on pre-LWA site work at Clinch River, consideration should be given to whether this is the most appropriate use of the Commissioners' time during a period when the Commission's resources are strained by the pressure to issue operating licenses for large numbers of reactors in the face of increasing indications of significant unresolved safety issues and major defects in quality assurance programs conducted during the construction process. Finally, to the extent that Clinch River is intended as a demonstration of the commercialization potential of breeder reactors (. including their ability to be licensed by NRC) , it appears somewhat self-defeating to shortcut the normal - licensing process at the first opportunity. In the event that the Commission grants the exemption sought by the Secretary, public confidence in the regulatory process as it applies to Clinch River and future breeders may suffer unnecessary and irreparable harm. - Thank you for your consideration of these views. I will watch
- your deliberations on this matter with great interest.
Sincerely, u , , h MO RIS K. UDALL Chairman i e = l d e L
d I
$i j . y
.. l
{ y*4 t-e-3 .- i i 3 3 ! i i l I i I
? 3 FOR RELEASE: December 9, 1981 CONTACT: Ken Burton AM 202-225-2844 Paul Parshley 202-225-8331 UDALL TO NRC: AVOID HASTE ON CLINCH RIVER Congressman Morris K. Udall, D-Arizona, has urged the Nuclear Regulatory Comissier to " resist pressures to act with undue haste" on a request from the Secretary of Energy to begin i
site preparation work on the Clinch River Breeder Reactor (CRER)
- in March, 1982.
Udall, chainnan of the House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, which has primary jurisdiction over the nuclear regulatory process, said the commission decision "will establish a p ecedent and tone for future NRC 1:. censing actions regarding the breeder reactor program." On November 30, 1981, DOE Secretary James Edwards asked the commission to take the extraordinary step of granting Clinch River an exemption from existing regulations that allow site work to begin pricr to issuance of a construction permit, but after l issuance of a limited werk authorization (LWA). The exemption ' l sought by Secretary Edwards would allow CRER site work to begin before LWA environmental requirements are met.
"In the event that the cc= ission grants the exemption sought by the Secretary, public confidence in the regulatory I process as it applies to Clinch River and future breeders may i suffer unnecessary and irreparable harm," Udall said.
1 I Udall's comments were contained ir a letter to NRC Chainnan
' unzio Palladino. (A complete text is attached.)
k J w s o wn me, .. c,m tetycieq tepe+g
r, $$-53] ., y; , U '
. t. . .
Db SECRETARIAT RECORD COPY FEB 1 1 1982
. [- .
The Honorable Marilyn Bouquard United States House of Representatives . Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congresswoman Bouquard:
Thank you for your letter dated December 15, 1981, concerning the Department of Energy's (DOE) request for an exemption from certain Cecraission regulations for the Clinch River Breeder Reactor. On Decenber 24, 1981, the Commission issued the enclosed order outlining the procedures it will be following for considering the nerits of DOE's reuuest
.for an exemption to pemit them to uncertake certain site preparation activities prior to the issuance of a construction permit or limited work authorization by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The schedule established would pemit a Commission decision by early !! arch on -this request. -
l The Commission appreciates receiving your ccaments with respect to this l request and will irclude them as part of the record of the proceeding l Sincerely, EarltenKa meze} Carlton Kammerer, Director ,* Office of Congressional Affairs
.a
** ~~
i l
Enclosure:
As stated Identical letter sent to:
% ~
% Howard Baker '
% ItT g James Sasser Rep. John Duncan
~'
s mw_ i
, MARIL.W t t SYD BOUEUAR3 [s
( 2334 Ravuuses Houes Omcam= - as Wn . D.C. acets
'am oisp Tn.srescuc (202) 225. apt, 253Jayam m FsommaLOmca*= =
Pusuc WORKS
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Congress of tijeUnitch States -r- -
TELaresons. (613) EsM10e SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
""c' c " " '=" " ^ * ' "
- Kpouse of 31epresentatibed un,- O-es -
Cast Ramos.Tasseasses 37830 Glashington,DE. 20515 T- " 'U "'-'"' December 15, 1981 Honorable Nunzio J. Palladino Chairman Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20505 Re: In Re. Department of Energy, et al., Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant - Docket No. 50-237
Dear Mr. Chairman:
We have been advised that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission will soon be meeting with interested parties to consider the above referenced subject. In addition to the specific request of the Department of Energy for authority to expedite site preparation activities for the Clinch River Breeder Reactor, the Commission must consider the concerns of local government jurisdictions which might be affected by the project. On Tuesday, December 8, 1981, staff from our offices met with nine of the fourteen localities which had in 1976 sought to file as intervenors in DOE's application for a Limited Work Authorization for the CRBR project. Although these petitions were dismissed as untimely, the socio-economic impact of the project cited by these local govern-ments was subsequently raised on their behalf by the State of Tennessee. . . Based on our DecemlIer 8 meeting, it is our clear im-pression that these local jurisdictions now strongly support the application to expedite site preparation activities for CRBR. They intend to communicate their support directly to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Though we cannot speak directly for these local governmental units, we expect that they will express their intention to withdraw from any intervenor proceedings, to request that any issues raised on their behalf be withdrawn, and to support the DOE request for Termission to expedite site preparation activities. Because in most instances, the communication to the NRC from the local jurisdictions will require the concurrence of city councils or other government bodies, it is impossible for many of them to complete formal action in time for the b December 16th meeting of the Commission. Nevertheless, we ; L 9 -
m,
-e
,e a e
YJ o V consider it appropriate to convey to the Commission at this time, for inclusion in the commission's deliberations, the strong local sentiment in support of the CRBR project and DOE's request to the NRC. The support of the localities attending the 3ecember 8 meeting in Tennessee was unanimous, and we have every reason to expect that those jurisdictions unable to be represented at the meeting will also concur in the consensus to withdraw from intervenor proceedings, and to support the request of the Department of Energy to commence with Clinch River' site preparat'on activities as soon as possible. Sincerely,
/ )
.__==
fd H. B
, wA rd. , U.S.S.
YM [W'4/ es R. Sashdr, U.S.S. w s. a MarilyIf L. BougitXrd, M.C 1 i Ah, ohn J. fandan M.C.
=
t e 9 k. O
b M\C.h O
. SECRETARIAT RECORD COPY FEB 1 1 1982 The Honorable *tark llatfield, Chairman Subcomittee on Energy and Uater Development -
Conmittee on Appropriations United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear fir. Chaiman:
Thank you for your letter dated December 15, 1981, concerning the Depa rtment of Eneray's (DOE) request for an exemption from certain Commission regulations ' for the Clinch River Ereeder Reactor. , On December 24, 1901, the Coonission issued the enclosed' order outlining the procedures.it will be following for considering the merits of DDE's request for an exenstion to pemit them to undertake certa.in site preparation ~ activities prior to the issuance of a construction pemit.or litiited work - authorization by the I;uclear Regulatory Cctrission. The schedule established woulci pemit a Cenission decision by early itarch on this request. . The Cornission appreciates receiving your coinents with respect to this l request and will consider then as part of the record of the proceeding. Sincerely, i . Car 1%cu Ka: merer l -(
,- 'I Carl ton al' merer, Director l Office of Congressional Affairs
Enclosure:
l As s ta ted l l Identical Letter sent to: . Senator William Cohen I ! :7 6
,. Op - . . - -
~
~ '
o $hpc'
- l".a'"'S;M.- 2;".=".".?..?
O -
"=".t O ".;21, 0"ff#bT.'""
==_ . . . . . =_ ;.=_.=_. .
31Cniteb Sfafe. Senate
= = ." = :=.==:.,. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
=a== o e ""'
"::::L",.;."..'O4
-. .. ".Ol - :=:
. 20,".?"v,"
"'""J".~"","Jt "^ U "*". f" "' December 15, 1981
, N2."."."?'l"ll;';.":".4=l"-
i Honorable Nunzio J. Palladino Chairman Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555
Dear Mr. Chairman:
It has come to our attent. ion that the Department of Energy has . asked the nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) fotr authority to bec in preliminary site preparation activities for the Clinch River Breeder Reactor (.CRBR) in Tennessee by March of 1982. If the NRC were to authorize site preparation activities at this time, it would be compelled to grant exemptions from established regulatory pro-cedures for the CRBR. We have serious doubts about the-wisdom of
. granting such exemptions.
The Clinch River Breeder Reactor was authorized in 1970 by P'L. . 91-273 as a demonstration project that would. lead to the early commercialization of breeder reactcirs. Since its inception, NRC licensing of the CRBR has been an integral part of the project. c ; The contract signed by the Atomic Energy Commission, the Tennessee Valley Authority, Commonwealth Edison Company, and the Project Manage-ment Corporation stated that one of the principal objectives of this l project was "to help ... verify certain key characteristics and capabilities of breeder power plants for operation on utility systems such as licensability and safety, operability, reliability, avail-ability, maintainability, flexibility, and prospect for economy."' Congress further requi' red licensing for Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactors (LMFBR) by enacting P.L. 93-438, which stipulates .that any breeder demonstration plant that will provide electricity to a utility must be licensed. Throughout the annual debates over the CRBR, Congress has never exp:.essed support for regulatory exemptions for the project. To the contrary, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act conference agreement reaffirms the need for proceeding with the established regulatory course for the CRBR in order to make future commercialization possible. The Conference report states, "The conferees intend that the planc should be constructed in a timely and expeditious manner, so that a decision on the commercialization and deployment of - breeder reactors can be made on the basis of information obtained t in the operation of the plant." _ pph PDW _ 2
. O O s 4 e .,
We do not agree with Secretary Edward's assertions that the CRBR "... must be expeditiously constructed to meet the objectives of the CRBR program." To the contrary, we believe it is in the best interests of future commercial development of LMFBRs for the CRBR to undergo the established regulatory procedures without exemption. Furthermore, we believe granting exemptions to the CRBR could seriously erode the public's confidence in the federal nuclear energy programs in general and breeder reactors programs in particular. We hope you will consider these points during your review of the Department of Energy's request for exemption. Sincerely,
] ) .
Mark O.'Hatfield liiam S. Cohen United States Senator nited States Senator 9 ___ -- --}}