ML19308B585
| ML19308B585 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 12/04/1979 |
| From: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Mackinnon D AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8001150306 | |
| Download: ML19308B585 (5) | |
Text
. - - _
' 38 WiC
- ~
Mr. Douglas Macy,innon 1359 Bedford Avenue Sunnyvale, CA 94087
Dear Mr. MacKinnon:
Your letter of September 27, 1979, to the Secretary of Energy has been referred to the Nuclear Regulatory Ccmmission for reply.
You asked about new standards or regulations resulting from the Three Mile Island accident. Preliminary review of the accident identified several events that contributed significantly to its severity. All holders of operating licenses for nuclear power plants were instructed to take a number of irreditate actions to avoid repetition of those errors. The instructions were specified in a series of bulletins issued by the NRC Office of Inspection and Enforcement.
In addition, NRC orders were issued to licensees of operat-ing plants designed by Babcock and Wilcox confirming the agreenent by the licensees to shut down those plants and keep them shut down until short-term actions to enhance their capability and reliability to respond to transient events were taken and verified by NRC staff. The plants were then allowed to resume operation, but certain long-term modifications are still to be carried out as promptly as practicable. In addition, instructions have been sent to all utilities with a construction permit or an operating license for a nuclear power plant concerning follouup actions resulting frm NRC staff reviews regarding the Three Mile Island accident, including short-term recomendations of the TMI-2 Lessons Learned Task Force.
The NRC plans an initial review of its regulations, concentrating on rules broadly impacted by the Three Mile Island accident, such as operator training, emergency planning, environmental monitoring, and consistent treatment of fission product release caused by fuel failure. The schedule, subject to available resources, will be completion of initial review by June 1980, completion of relevant rule changes by 1982, and completion of systematic review of all safety regulations by 1984. The review cycle is expected to be repeated thereafter every five to seven years. The NRC also plans to reevaluate the rulemaking process to ensure that it is properly focused on resolving important safety issues and that the procedures are clear, under-standable, efficient and well published.
l OF Fice >l.
suaNaur F;'.
l oare >.
.l.
. 8.001.150 3 6 0 NCC FORM 318 (9-741 NRCU 3240 D U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1979 289 369 L
Mr. Douglas MacKinnon !
You asked who was responsible for the Three Mile Island accident. The Report
~
of the President's Commission on the Accident at Three Mile Island stated:
"In conclusion, while the major factor that turned this incident into a serious accident was inappropriate operator action, many factors contributed to the action of the operators, such as de-ficiencies in their training, lack of clarity in their operating procedures, failure of organizations to learn the proper lessons i
from previous incidents, and deficiencies in the design of the control room. These shortcomings are attributable to the utility, to suppliers of equipment, and to the federal connission that regulates nuclear power. Therefore -- whether or not operator error ' explains' this particular case -- given all the above de-ficiencies, we are convinced that an accident like Three Mile Island was eventually inevitable."
You asked who is liable for debts and damages resulting from the Three Mile Island accident. Under the Price-Anderson Act, there is a system of private funds and, when needed, government indemnity, totaling up to $560 million, to pay public liability claims for personal injury an property damage resulting from a nuclear incident. The private funds are provided by two nuclear liability insurance pools and, when needed, by assessmant against utilities operating nuclear power plants.
Representatives of one of tse nuclear liability insurance pools, American Nuclear Insurers, arrived at Harrisburg, Pa., on March 23, 1979, the day after the Three Mile Island accident began, to ascertain the necessity of establishing a claims office. Following the advisory by the Governor of pennsylvania that pregnant woman and pre-school age children living within a five mile radius of the plant should leave the area, ANI established a claims office to pay claims for living expenses for these people together with others who had special medical problems. On March 31, the first day of operation at the emergency claims center, ANI made payments of almost $12,000.
The payments increased daily, reaching a peak of more than $167,000 on April 9.
As of the end of September, cumulative payments for evacuation expenses and lost wages were more than $1,302,000 and involved about 12,000 individuals.
A total of 4,224 claims had been received by ANI, including 113 claims of economic consequences.
C.,,Cc h.
suRN.q...
oArc.
hvERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE:
1979-289 369 NOC FORM M8 (9 76) NRCM 0240 U
Mr. Douglas MacKinnon Finally, you asked about State emergency plans. The NRC has concurred in the plans of 14 States for responding to emergencies involving the release of radioactivity from nuclear facilities. In addition, there are 15 States with plans under review and 11 States with plans under development. (The remaining States are not impacted by licensed nuclear power plants.) The question of NRC concurrence with State and local plans does not relate to the reactors themselves but to the adequacy of dealing with 70 essential planning elements that the NRC has specified. These are listed in the enclosure on "NRC Office of State Programs Standards and Procedures for Concurrence in State and Local Government Radiological Emergency Response Plans" of March 15, 1977. Also enclosed is NRC report NUREG-75/111, which is referred to. The NRC has under consideration a rule that would condition the issuance of operating licenses and the continued operation of existing plants upon approval of State emergency response plans with fixed time periods.
Sincerely, g'
t
'U2 Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
1.
NUREG-75/111 (Reprint of WASH-1293 2.
Supplement No. 1 to NUREG-75/lli DISTRIBUTION Docket file 50-32D NRC DPR. >
.o w LPDR h
o,. ~
HRDenton EGCase RMinigue RRyan HShapar GErtter (ED0-7657)
MGraff PFine MASB R/F Berkow/ Russell DVassallo
,9 i
DMuller RMattson l
DEisenhut Nht:MASBf{.
./NRR:DJ.ih..
ED0 NRff:DDIF
[
OFFICE h
.. y.
m.\\ y.
l
..PFin.e;pab.,
EGCase.,,
, HRD.e, ntion,.
,LVGossi.ck, SURNAME oate>j.11/4/29 11/p/79..
11fd 79..
l f
1 N:c ronu sis (9-16) Nacu d24o tu.5. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFict: 3979 289 369
L;., _.
- Ml FROM.
ACTION CONTROL DATES CONTROL NO Douglas MacKinnon CoupL oE40uNe singj7.
07657 Sunnyvale CA ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATE OF DOCUMENT INTERIM REPLY gfpyfg TO:
/
PREPARE FOR SIGNATURE (DOE (Referred to MRC 10/24/79) wiNaLaEpLy/
_4_
%cs,RMAN FILE LOCAT10N
/
C EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 0. J. __ 6 /. /,,
WW OTHER:
DESCRIPTICN C LETTER C MEMO C REPORT C OTHER SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS Questions concerning safety of nuclear P.nergy CLASSIFIED DATA l
OOCU'/ ENT. COPY NO CLASSIFICATION l I
N'vMBER OF PAGES C A T EGO..Y PCST AL A EGISTRY NO..
C NSI C RD C 'RD AS31 M C 70-CATE INFCRMATION ROUTING LEG AL REVIEW
.T.
FIN 4L C COPY gg jgggfyg gg ASSIGNEC TO:
OATE Nr L CB.,ECT6 CNS
[
/e
[b
$g i _7,.
Minogue C E20 A c vin s Cc RREs ea-
/, _,
[
')
-/
EXT.
g Q/MW
'*7; f.-
9,..
W l CO.'.iMENTS. NOTI FY:
f fy.as w * ~
~
,y l
- EX T.
l l
. i-}
..o.
.,ff JCAE NCT!FICATION RECC'.1MENDEC-C YES C NC l
'm C rar. 200 EXECUTIVE DIRESTCR FCP CPE?AT'CNS ca.vor 45uovE rws C0e '
PRINCIPAL CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL 0}QD h
~'
'l *q IO Department of Energy Washington. D.C. 20545 CCT,. n!]
Mr. Douglas MacKinnon 1369 Bedford Ave.
Sunnyvale, CA 94087
Dear Mr. MacKinnon:
This is in response to your letter of September 27 to the Secretary of Energy which defined certain questions en the safety of nuclear power plants.
We find that your questions would be best answered by the Nuclear Regulatory Comission (NRC) and therefore by copy of this letter we are transmitting your letter to NRC, Sincerely,
.nin.o signed 4,
^~
..,,,o.caen ] ~
A. J. Pressesk9, Director Division of Nuclear Power Development cc:
L. Gossick, NRC L -
(w/cy of inc, ltr.)
,9
"~
Douglas MacKinnon 136 9 Bedford Ave.
Sunnyvale, California 96087 Septeaber 27,19T 9 Charles Duncan Secretary of Er..ergy Independence Ave, and Tenth Street SW Washington D.C.
20003 l
Dear Mr. Duncan,
I as writing you in order to recieve certain information concerning 4
the safety of nuclear energy. I would like to know what the governrent will do in the insediate future for the population surrounding nuclear reactors.
Please respond to the following questions.
l d) What new standards or regulations have been l
passed as a result of the Three Mile Island M" 2) Has the government determined who holds the incident ?
T responsibility of the Three Mile Island
(
incident? If the government has who is it?
M
) Since the governnent regulates nuclear energy,
'3 is the government liable for debts and Q
damages resulting from this incident? If not who will pay the claise?,
- 4) A report from the G.A.O. stated that only 10
' out of 43 states with consercial or military P'..
reactors et with all of the N.R.C. 's energency planning and preparedness standards.
What types of probless did those states encounter which unde their reactors unfit to pass?
l I would like thank you, in advance, for answering these questions and I anxiously await your response.
Sincerely, h + n.c L. a..
Douglas MacKinnon 1
l
.