The same thing is true on test and demonstration and training. PMC has an obligation to the utility participants to provide training for their people. TVA also has a responsibility to provide training for its operating people. That is why training appears in each of the slides. The next chart is just a heavy line which shows the AEC function in the same manner overlapping here. Example again: Under training and test and demonstration, we know through our work at the Liquid Metal Engineering Center (LMEC) we will be testing prototype components. We know from experience that when we start testing a prototype pump it is wise to get the operators, the TVA people out here to be a part of that testing and maintenance program at LMEC. Mr. SHAW. This is the bits-and-pieces approach, Mr. Hosmer, as you recall, of taking a valve and putting it through tests, going through the maintenance procedures, so that we know that when we have installed it in our plant, we will have maintenance procedures as well as trained people. Representative HOLIFIELD. On that point, in your base program work for research and development, you will develop a pump. You will test that pump and operate it. That pump will not necessarily, and probably will not go into the reactor, but it will serve, as I understand, as the identical prototype for the pump that will go into the demonstration reactor. Is that right? Mr. SHAW. That is correct, sir. 20-233 0-73- -6 Representative HOLIFIELD. Is that true of other component parts which will be developed within your control, within the AEC's ongoing program of research and development? Mr. SHAW. Yes; that is true, with one exception, Mr. Holifield. We are trying to get alternate design work going. This is again a chart I have used in previous hearings. The FFTF pump you see is relatively small compared to a demonstration plant pump by about a factor of three. We know that we have to move up to a larger size. [Chart 10 follows:] Mr. SHAW. We know that we have only one pump vendor. We want to get another one involved and working. This pump work in the base program has been going on under the direction of General Electric. General Electric is working with Byron Jackson and Westinghouse. We are working on one-pump concept now, hoping that we will have an option for two-pump concept. The pump is quite a key element, and these pumps will be available for our testing to prove them out or find the troubles. It is in this mode that we are operating under the base program, sir. Representative HOLIFIELD. Speaking of a secondary producer is in line with our whole procedure over the years in order, No. 1, to get the value of the competition that is involved and also get the cost competition. Mr. SHAW. Yes, sir. We have not been able to do it as much as we would have liked, but we know it is a very healthy thing with regard to design too. We know that two competitors, working in this manner, can enhance both. Representative HOLIFIELD. Both of them would be working on design specifications furnished by the RDT? Mr. SHAW. Yes, sir. We have a pump standard. Westinghouse will be heavily involved in this pump effort because they are currently handling the FFTF pump; however, General Electric has been assigned the responsibility to get us a good pump for the demo plant. This was before any decision was made with regard to the lead reactor manufacturer. General Electric has the steam generator and the pump responsibility as a method for moving ahead in these two areas. Representative HOLIFIELD. I did not necessarily mean that RDT would do the physical work itself, but it would be under the supervision and agreed-upon designs and criteria by the PSC and approved by the PMC? Mr. SHAW. Yes, sir. Referring back to the previous chart, that pump work is going on under "AEC labs and contractors" shown at the right of the chart. When we get a pump that is to be purchased for this plant the procurement will shift over to the left and be purchased by Westinghouse, subject of course to the agreement of the PSC. Representative HOSMER. In the beginning, Mr. Shaw, you assured us that the methodology with which you were going to approach the demonstration program was such that at some point near its conclusion you would not only have a successful piece of machinery put together, but would have developed a considerable competency within the utility industry itself. Do you conceive a plan to operate breeder reactors amongst various vendors, or manufacturing plants, to compete successfully and knowledgeably with craftsmanship and other assurances in the supply of a product, namely, that we were more or less setting up an operation here which would give us a greater reactor industry in being, at least at an early stage, so that our development of breeder reactors on a large commercial basis thereafter would be expedited? What element of that has been left in this scheme that has been up here? set Mr. SHAW. I think we have done two things here, Mr. Hosmer. The element of it that is here is as follows: The work going on in nuclear steam supply system, of course, is primarily that related to getting an industrial capability to be able to build breeder systems that are good enough for the utility industry to examine and consider purchasing. This in no way removes the utility role of looking over this function in a manner to assure that they have a capability to buy a proven product if it is proven, and be able to employ it successfully on their grids. Mr. RAMEY. Of course, Mr. Hosmer, in that connection, the Breeder Reactor Corp. representing the 350-plus utilities that are contributing about $250 million to it, are providing people to participate in the project, and they are regularly being kept up to date on the progress of the project. We would expect them to participate more actively as the project gets going. So, the utility industry, both privately and publicly owned, has a monetary stake in this project and an interest in it and a means through the Breeder Reactor Corp. and the Project Management Corp. of participating and being informed. Mr. SHAW. Particularly, we have a responsibility to provide information to the participants and to the entire utility industry for that matter. In order to make sure they are kept up to date not only in the development effort but also when we get into the hardware stage, we expect the utilities to be involved." This is a question of resources. How many people do we put on the project and how quickly can these people learn. It is this kind of detail that we want to work out among the participants. Certainly, the principle today opens the door wide for them as well as other utilities to get involved. In fact, I think most of our collective efforts have been directed at trying to encourage the other utility participants to have their people assigned to PMC or to our various facilities in order to accomplish this goal. Representative HOSMER. Thank you. Chairman PRICE. Mr. Shaw, how does this FFTF pump compare in size to the German pump? Mr. SHAW. Our demo plant pump will probably be about the same size as the German SNR pump. Bud tells me that the one they had on test is approximately the same as the FFTF. The SNR pump will be about the same size as ours though. This chart is on the TVA. Of course, TVA being responsible for the operations of the plant will become involved across the board on safety and operation of this plant. Safety is TVA's overriding responsibility, as we have indicated in our descriptive material provided to you. [Chart 11 follows:] Mr. SHAW. There is nothing any of us, PMC or RDT, that can in any sense encourage or cause TVA to do anything unsafe with regard to that plant. They must have the final say with regard to safety. Representative HOLIFIELD. Is this whole imposition of the requirement before the line on the bottom of the charts in complete accord with the direction of this committee that all information developed should be within the public sector, that it should be available to all utilities, participating and non-participating, and all manufacturers, whether they happen to be participating or not? In other words, is it designed to give this information, most of which has been paid for or will be paid for by public funds, to the public? Mr. SHAW. Yes, sir, in addition to that, there have been a series of meetings on this, and perhaps Mr. Behnke could summarize those briefly and explain how the BRC is set up to go even further than just making reports available. STATEMENT OF WALLACE BEHNKE, CHAIRMAN, PROJECT MANAGEMENT CORP. Mr. BEHNKE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As part of our program to keep the industry informed on the progress of this plant and also provide them the information that we are developing; we have already begun a series of meetings with the utility industry. For example, last January we held a briefing session on the project for top utility executives. This was done in Chicago. The project team described in considerable detail the progress which had taken place so far including technical descriptions of the decisions that had been made. That meeting was followed by a second session for top engineering executives of utilities in the United States at which the same material was covered in substantially more detail. You will be interested to know that just last Wednesday, the Project Management Corp. staff met with the Project Review Committee of Breeder Reactor Corp., and brought that committee of BRC up to date in fine detail on what has transpired since the beginning of the year. In addition to that, we are providing written communications to the industry describing the project. We contemplate that in the future, we will be issuing not only summary reports but detailed reports as to what is going on. I might comment further that we have some other mechanisms for keeping utilities informed and providing them opportunities for work experience on the project. Mr. Shaw talked about the opportunities for utility engineers to participate on the staff of PMC. We already have engineers assigned from participating utilities, two from Southern California Edison, one from Consolidated Edison and Consumers Power Co. in addition to those from Commonwealth Edison and TVA. Working in PMC, these engineers have an opportunity to work side-by-side with the AEC people developing and reviewing plans, setting project requirements and also schedules and budgets and following progress as the project moves forward. |