Irony: Looking Back on Thirty Years: Senate Hearing on Nuclear Safety Complacency and Lessons Learned

April 3, 2009


Honorable Senator Thomas A. Carper
Chairman, Senate Environmental and Public Works Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety
United States Senate 513 Hart Building
Washington, DC 20510

Three Mile Island Looking Back on Thirty Years: Senate Hearing on Nuclear Safety Complacency and Lessons Learned
(Hearing March 24, 2009)
Senate Webcast: rtsp://video.webcastcenter.com/srs_g2/epw032409.rm?start=17:20

Dear Senator Carper:

March 28, 1979, undercooling damaged Three Mile Island Unit 2’s reactor. Events came to be known as “Three Mile Island,” or simply “TMI.” While the hearing’s general review of lessons learned and safety improvements since TMI was ad hoc, Senators asked several substantive new questions: “What do we still need to do to avoid nuclear safety complacency?” and, “Can we improve nuclear license process duration, maintaining safety? Must design reviews licensing new Light Water Reactors (LWR) plants take five years or longer to safely complete?”

The nuclear industry has been lethargic deploying current technology. Digital controls remain unapproved for nuclear use today. Slow progress approving digital controls demonstrates performance failure. When nonperformance becomes the norm, Senate oversight should challenge agencies to find better ways to get the job done.

In its commemorative hearing March 24, NRC failed to answer several substantial Senate’s Subcommittee questions. For example, whether new plant license reviews could be shortened while maintaining safety was not answered.

Interviewees failed to answer Senators’ questions completely. Some failed to address some questions at all. To avoid complacency, restore candor in nuclear dialogue and regain public confidence, we must demand, like Admiral Rickover -- “Answer the question, please!”[1]

As follow-up, the Senate EPW Clean Air & Nuclear Safety Subcommittee should ask the NRC's commissioners to:

• Defend current safety improvement processes.
• Review safety performance with continuous process improvement methods[2]
• Review the new licensing process implementation method for overall effectiveness
• Engage those able to independently assess nuclear performance using continuous improvement methods
• Establish a safety review licensing timeline based on substantial content milestones
• Pilot an NRC continuous improvement process like the US Department of Commerce Baldrige application, proven in use by other federal agencies .

Sincerely,

J.K. August, PE
J.J. Hunter SRO
CORE, Inc.
303-425-7408/970-330-1411
Attachment: Senate Response to Hearing Review
Re: EPW CA& NS Hearing Three Mile Island: Thirty years looking back

[1] Actually, it was -“Answer the question, dammit!” Evasive, incomplete or specious responses inflamed the Admiral, causing him to ask, “Do you really want this [nuclear] program?” He followed that shortly by shouting his legendary dismissal, “Get the h…out of my office, you horse’s ass…”
[2] The Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center, US Army Picatinny, NJ. (ARDEC) The “home of American firepower” won the US Department of Commerce Baldrige Award in 2007. "Lean 6-Sigma” is another process improvement approach approved by DOD. All have common elements.