Chernobyl Nuclear Accident Congressional Hearings Transcript

140
are 25 BWR units with Mark I containments in operation in the U.S., according to a
1984 study done for NRC.
Questions concerning whether the Mark I containment would withstand a severe
accident have taken on new importance following the Chernobyl disaster, Denton
said. And in response to the political climate following the accident, industry and
the NRC should focus on the integrity of Mark I containment rather than continuing
to debate the probability of severe accidents.
"We can argue about the probability of severe core damage for a long time,"
Denton said. "I think the political climate is such that p)eople are willing to concede
that maybe they (severe accidents) vvrill happen now and then at U.S. plants, despite
the best efforts of everyone. But they want to know it won't turn into the Chernobyl-type
event."
For that reason, Denton said, NRC will give "a lot of attention" to industry efforts
concerning the integrity of Mark I containment. He said Idcor (Industry Degraded
Core Rulemaking Program) studies on ways to "be sure these containments
don't fail early due to overpressurization ... should really be top priority." To protect
containments from the overpressurization "would require positive ways to
Mark I
vent and filter before you get a high pressure buildup," Denton added.
Denton said in an interview following his address that the message he was trying
to convey to industry was: "If you want to find something to go look at that has a
high payoff, that (Mark I containments) is not so bad."
The notion that a Mark I containment might fail in the event of a severe accident
wEis strongly disputed in an earlier address to the conference by an official from
Philadelphia Electric Co., who said that that perception has resulted from computer
models "driven by silly little assumptions."
"The perception of the Mark I problem is totally unwarranted," said Richard Diederich,
who is in charge of probabilistic risk assessments for Philadelphia Electric.
Inaccurate assumptions used for the sake of conveninece by both the NRC and Idcor
in modeling accident sequences and the risk of containment failure led to the perception,
Diederich said. But '
it's not true."
GE, in a statement released after questions were raised concerning its containments
following the Chernobyl accident, said: "Attacks on the safety of the containment
system used with GE reactors represent a rehash and exploitation of items
that were raised and then resolved eight years ago ... GE reactors are safe." -Brian
Jordan, Brookhaven National Library.
The Chairman. If there would be no further questions for this
panel, I wish to thank each of you, and I wish to thank the members
of the second panel for their patience. The committee will
stand in recess and will return in just a few minutes.
[The committee was recessed.]
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
Our second panel in the hearing today. Dr. Schulten, director. Institute
for Reactor Development, Nuclear Research Center, Julich,
Germany; Mr. John Taylor, vice president, nuclear power division,
EPRI; Mr. Zack Pate, president. Institute of Nuclear Power Operations;
Dr. Richard Dean, senior vice president, GA Technologies,
Inc.; and Mr. Jan Beyea, senior staff scientist. National Audubon
Society.
We will start with Dr. Schulten, and as I said to the other panel,
your entire prepared statements will be placed in the record. You
are invited to summarize the statements in whatever manner you
wish. Dr. Schulten? We do thank you very much for your willingness
to appear here.
STATEMENT OF DR. RUDOLF SCHULTEN, NUCLEAR RESEARCH
CENTER, JULICH, GERMANY
Dr. Schulten. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, may I introduce
myself. My name is Schulten. I work in the Nuclear Research
Center, Julich, which is located near Cologne, in Germany, and
which is one of the two big nuclear centers in my country.