QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR WALLOP

Nuclear Power Plant Construction Schedules

Question 7:

Answer:

Institution problems are often cited as the reason
why we cannot build nuclear power plants in the United
States. Japan and France are often used as examples of it
taking only four to six years to build a nuclear power
plant and put it into operation.

a. Why is this the case in Japan and France? If I am correct, these countries rely on a licensing system similar to that in the United States. Would you comment?

b. Are standardized designs critical to expediting this process?

There are some significant practical differences

in the way the licensing system is implemented in Japan and France. In both countries, there is closer cooperation between the utilities, vendors, and the licensing agencies. Their relationships are less adversarial, and safety issues are resolved earlier. Hearings and legal tactics have not been used to extensively delay or prevent operation of safe plants.

Standardized designs are also important in achieving these construction times. Standardization will eliminate design changes during construction and will enable standardized construction techniques to be implemented.

Nuclear Power Option

Question 8(a):

Answer:

QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR WALLOP

Public confidence in the nuclear power option

is essential if it is to play a role in our nation's energy future. Passive safety features are critical to the public's acceptance of nuclear power. Would you agree?

We certainly agree that the safety of reactors is a critical factor with respect to the public's acceptance of nuclear power. This safety can and must be achieved for any reactor type through a host of measures including its design, operation, and maintenance. The use of passive safety features, such as natural circulation cooling or emergency cooling through gravity, is one path to reducing the probability and/or the consequences of accidents.

In addition, this simplified approach to safety may ease
explanations to the public on how the safety regulations
are being satisfied. To say, however, that passive
features are critical to the public's acceptance of
nuclear power, I believe goes too far. Public surveys
have shown that a majority of the public would not believe
it impossible for a serious accident to occur in a
passively safe nuclear plant. Further, while those in

industry and government familiar with nuclear technology
consider the use of passive design features to be

positive, such is not necessarily the case with the

public. In fact, a survey has shown adverse public reaction to use of the term "passive" as a design feature, because it conveys negative connotations of inaction to assure safety. The public does believe, however, that future advanced plants will be improved over earlier plants in a number of respects, including safety.

In our view, what is critical is that the industry and regulators continue to maintain a high degree of safety and reliability in the operation of current plants, and that all reasonable steps be taken to provide assurance to the public that adequate safety measures, by several diverse paths, are being taken in the design and operation of any new plants.

QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR WALLOP

Safety

Question 8(b):

In your judgment, do liquid metal reactors and hightemperature gas-cooled reactors have advantages with regard to passive safety features?

Answer:

These modular advanced reactors, are designed to take full advantage of natural physical laws, thus enhancing their passive safety. The advanced liquid metal reactor and the high temperature gas-cooled reactor are capable of reactor shutdown under adverse conditions without the need for

further operator action and decay heat removal.

Nuclear Power Future

Question 8(c):

QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR WALLOP

If we are concerned for the future of nuclear power, would you agree that there is a need for a more active Federal support for these technologies in addition to "advanced" light water reactors?

Answer:

The Department's Nuclear Energy Strategy is based on an integrated vision of the role nuclear energy can play in the Nation's energy future. In the near-term, between now and 2000, our efforts are focused on new nuclear plant orders based on advanced light water reactor technology as the vehicle for a revitalized nuclear option. Sometime after 2010, advanced nuclear systems that show promise of improvements in safety and waste management potential could be available. Advanced liquid metal reactors (ALMR) and modular high temperature gas reactors (MHTGR) could be available for commercial deployment following successful completion of research, development, and demonstration and design certification by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

The budget request for advanced reactor R&D is consistent with the scope and pace of development required for ALMR and MHTGR technologies.