ML20079A867
| ML20079A867 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 04/24/1991 |
| From: | Sasser J SENATE |
| To: | Carr K NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19325B691 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9105210236 | |
| Download: ML20079A867 (6) | |
Text
_ - - -. -. _ - - -.
.. o p g gv al 11:13 20M O nb bii:
'f JIM 1ASSta n am 4
N8" Amominos l
e ANUNG. WOUSWO.
AND URLAN AFF A:R$
11nited Starts ;Nocnatt
, m n WA$H.NGTON QC 10$10 4101 00VL*WlvtAL, A,, Aing i
April 24, 1991 F
Honorable Kenneth M. Carr Chairman Nuclear Regulatory Commission Waahington, DC 20555 Dear Mr. Carrt The Tennessee Valley Energy Coalition (TVtC) has recently contacted me regarding future plans for the nuclear program at the Tennessee Valley Authority.' A copy of that correspondence in enclosed.
I would be interested in the Commission'a view of recent developments in this area.
I TVA Chairman Marvin Runyon has been quoted as saying that, accordit-
' current grnvth projections, TVA must begin committing funde i;o a new power source by 1994 and he believes a new nuclear plant im a crudible option.
- Furthur, Mr. Runyon has visited Japan to invest'igate the possibility of building a Japanese nuclear plant i!n the TVA area.
The new nuclea' plant would be in addition to the completion of the Watts Bar and Bellefonte plants an'd the restart of the Browns Ferry plant.
l l
1 am interested in your opinion regarding the issues the TVEC raises.
Por instanca, are you satisfied that TVA is making suf ficient progress with existing plants to justify Mr. Runyon's optimistic growth projections?
I would also be interested in the Co:rmission's opinion' of Mr. Runyon's idea to build a Japanese plant.
Are U.S. companies qualified to undertake future nuclear development and construction?
t Other questions of concern to me are:
I How would you assess the management attitude at TVA o
toward safety and regulatory compliance?
I e
can you assure me that TVA will operate its Browns Ferry and Watts Bare nuclear facilities safely, if permission is granted to generate power from them?
When do you believe these plants and the Bellefonte plant will be operating?
How would you summarize the regulhtory problems l
e I
nncountered by the NRC. at TVA over thejpast two years?
l i
l
/O D IO D3 h fp> ><f4
u a ;$,v1 11-44
> " " ' 8 ' a '
u April 24, 1991 Page 2 I would appreciate a in depth answers to my questions at your earliest possible convenience.
Thank you for your attention to this matter and I look forward to hearing from you.
...cerply,
/,
J Ji. Sasser D ited States Senator v
.I O
OGQ O i
1 e
i J
l I
t e-
0D25491 11:14 sticow GD IID goua j
1 I
Tobruary 24, 1991 6
Tonncasee valley Energy coalition p.0. Box 27245 Knoxville, Tn. 37927 Senator James Sasser U.S.
Sonate Was hing t.cn, DC 20510 i
Daar Sonator Sasser, Wit.h cur trocps at war in the Parsian Gulf, and the Admin ~
intration's unveiling of its energy policy,' tany Anericane feci uneasy about the continuing the status quo of energy :;roduction and consumption. Currently, the Dush administration pol;.cy has taken an alar =ing turn close to home.
The Tennessee Vallay Authority is ai:parently slated to be the showcase of the administration's revamping of nuoloar power.
Tho debates about the place of nuclear power and the policios of TVA have gone on for some years now. We believe that a number of recent developments give cause for concern for people on both sides of the fence.
Despite TVA's bad experience with nuoloar power and its massive S19 billion debt, Marvin Funyon has announced that he intends to bring all 7 of TVA's idled reactors on line. Chainan Runyon, in cc:.=ents to the press nado two disturbing statements.
The first was to the effect that nuclear power was a necessary part of reducing the country's dependence on foreign oil. As you are no doubt cuare, there is really no connection betwoon the two issues -
the U.S. gets about 20% of its electricity : rom nuclear power and about 5% from oil. A second statement I by Mr. Runyon was more striking. Iie stated that TVA was able to license nuclear power plants more easily than most utilities because, unlike them, TVA doab not answer to public utilities commissions. This seemed to be another way of saying that TVA is not accountable.
Ono could certainly be forgiven forIhaving that impression.
The problems stemming from TVA's problematic nuclear plants and their huge debts have been documanced inL ocal, regional, and l
national press stories. Yet TVA can announce its plans to tio the Tonn. Valley ratupayers to further nuclear adventures without much outcry being raised (yet).
1 This re-emphasis on nuclear power see=s especially inapprep-riate in the vako of TVA's curtai1=ent of its conservation and energy efficiency programs, m act that contrasts strongly with the policy of progrea,sive utilities across the country. Chairnan Runyon said that the 540 million conservation program was "tco expensive".
I i
vi.a n I
l l
TVEC - 2 Botween 1977 and 19CS, TVA's conservation program helped weatherize 630,000 households, cado S4 million in loans for businons weatheri:ation, and saved an nattmated 1.2 billion watts of olectrical capacity (about the equivalent of a reactor).
TVA Director John Waters said that the conservatien program van bogun at a time when there wan a shortage of clectricity, but that now there was adequate capacity. So why the need for more nuelaar plants. We suspuut that TVA's roluctance to embraco enorgy of ficiency measures comes from their realization that a ocrious inventnant in such a pelicy vould show their nuclear plants to be unnacecuary.
David Freeman, the f ormer TVA director who haltod expan-S.
nien of the nuclear program wuon it became apparent that it was basnd en innaccurato projections of demand, is now general manager of Sacramento Municipal Utility District, which is investing in a major c:: ort towards energy conservation and efficiency. He told the EneWille Journal (July 17, 1990),
"I think they (TVA) have made the wrong choice, and the consunors in the Tonn. Valley are going to pay :or it. It's considered around the country a backward utility instand of a leader".
l There is serious doubt that TVA paql.d revamp ito nucinar I
program at all. The probin=s at Watts Dar are symptomatic of the program as a whole. The Nuclear Rogulatory Commission, known for being a friend of the industry, has made some of its harshest statements on record about the Watts Bar plant.
NRC Southern regional administrator Stuart Ebneter:
"I've never seen anything Worse anywhora elsa" than Watts Bar work controlo.
"Youdon'tneedanymoreBand-}e.idfixes. You need fun-damental changes".
Steve Varga, NRC canager, said that the fundamentals over-looked by TVA at Watts Bar are covered in a basic construction course at the junior college lovel.
(Quotes from Knoxville News-Sentine}l, January 16, 1991).
And yet, Dan Nauman, the slated replace =ent for Oliver Kingsley as TVA nuclear chief, speaks about TVAta acommitment...
to become the number one nuclear program in the country".
iments at running a nuclear program and have a right to beTVIC fnele the r supplied power by a least-cost, economically feasible means.
We hope that you will speak out for such an approach to energy policy and help stop the massive loss of funds and resourcos to TVA's ineffective nuclear program. We can only surmise what a fraction of those sums invested in 'onergy efficiency could accomplish.
I one way to inclutnce this proce.ss is to take a hard look at the qualifications and outlook of that current nomineo to the TVA Board, William Kennoy of Lexington, Ky. Is he qualified to bring new vision and perspective to TVA, lor is he merely another political appointoa to a millionalros club?
TVIO hopes that we can work together to bring a responsible, sustainable energy policy to the Tennessee Valley.
e
. 'J 4 J $. 91 11.15 5tisCOM GD TED i*suus i
~
TVEC - 3 I
sincerely, h1 Doug Daiglo TVIC I
P.S.
Enclosed are ccpies of artic1co which have appeared over the past *ew months that give a clear and Vivid picture of both the TVA energy agenda and conditions at Watts Dar.
e i
i I
t I
t I
I a
l r
i F
I f
j
{
l J
.I
)
CONGRZ8810NAL CORA28PONDENCE SYSTEM
]
DOCUMENT PREPAAATION CMECRLIST
]
This checklist is be submitted with each docuneat (or group of j
Qs/As) sent for e
'ing into the CCs.
1.
BRIEF DESCRIPTICP OF DOCUMENT (8) bK 2
Type Or DoCUxzwT
. l --
Carrespondense Neariage (Qs/As)
)
1 3.
DOCUKENT CONTROL Sensitive (WRC Only) l ' ' Wen-Sensitive 1
4.
CONORESSIONAL COMMITTER and SURCOMMITTEES (if applicable) i j
Congressional Committee
]
Subcommittee 5.
HU5 JECT CODES I
(al (b) i (c) 4 SOURCE OF DOCUMENTS i
(a) 5520 (document name (b)
Scan.
(s)
Atlashments (d)
Rakey (e)
Other i
7.
SYSTEM LOS DATES (a)
Id 9I Date oCA seat dooumont to CCS (b)
Date CCS receives doouseat i
(e)
Date returned to M for additional information (4)
Date resubmitted by-ocA to ces
~
e (e)
Date entered late CCS by (f)
Date OCA notified that document is in CCS 8
COMMENTS 1
-.