ML19344D895
| ML19344D895 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 08/15/1980 |
| From: | Snyder B Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Mervine B AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8008260278 | |
| Download: ML19344D895 (4) | |
Text
32LO.)
e j
UNITED STATES g
3c(, g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n
j~r WASHINGTON, D. C. 20655 AUGUST ! 5 1980 Mr. Bruce E. Mervine 53 South Adams Street York, Pennsylvania 17404
Dear Mr. Mervine:
Your letter to President Carter about paying for the costs of the accident at the Three Mile Island nuclear station was referred to me for response.
Extraordinary Nuclear Occurrence (ENO) is a term defined in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), which identifies those nuclear accidents where compensation to people for damages or injuries will be on a no-fault basis.
In the event of a nuclear accident resulting in small releases or minor damages, these no-fault provisions would not apply and normal legal pro-cedures would be followed for persons subnitting damage claims.
The NRC was given the authority in the Act to detennine whether or not an ac-cident can be classified as an ENO. The Act defines an EN0 as an event that causes a discharge of radioactive materials in amounts causing offsite radia-tion levels that the Commission determines to be substantial and that the Com-mission determines has resulted or will result in sehstantial damages to offsite persons or property. The Commission was required by the Act to establish specific criteria in its regulations for making the EN0 determination. Although the ac-cident at TMI was not a normal occurrence and would be considered extraordinary in everyday language, the Commission, in an April 16, 1980, finding, determined that the accident does not meet specific criteria for an EN0 as defined by the Price-Anderson Act and the Comission regulations.
The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC), in a decision and order of Jue l';,1979, ruled that costs of damages caused by the accident at Three Mile Island,,vuld not be included in the present rate base for customers of Metro-politan Edison and the Pennsylvania Electric Company. These customers will, however, be responsible for costs associated with purchasing power to replace power that the TMI facility would have provided. The Pennsylvania PUC re-affirmed this decision in an order of May 23, 1980.
In the same order, it also ruled that Three Mile Island Unit 1 be removed from the Metropolitan Edison and Pennsylvania Electric Company rate bases. As.a result, their customers will be free of all maintenance, interest, and capital cost expenses assr:iated with Unit 1.
Should Unit 1 be returned to service, costs associated with its operation would, of course, become part of the rate structure.
8 008260 g7g
Mr. Bruce E. Mervine 2-AUGUST 1 5 1960 i
While we are, of course, concerned about financial impacts on consumers, the
)
NRC's primary responsibility is the assurance of public health and safety.
State public utility commissions and the Federal Energy Regulatory Camnission have primary responsibility regarding the rates that consumers pay for elec-tricity. They should be able to provide information for your use.
I appreciate your concerns and assure you that every effort is being made to l
ensure the continued protection of the health and safety of the public, not only at Three Mile Island, but also at all nuclear power plants.
Sincerely, RWS M
Bernard J. Snyder, Program Director Three Mile Island Program Office Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 4
O e
'if
,7 a, (, m, ;,>u-11 ) /
8 p
/
o /,,'
' I1 53 South A cla r ns St ect f1 Y g f
yV f ftfffl(/
2[i Yon-Ic. Pen nsylva nla 174 04
,f'f' 0
M, l
g s :,
n
&Qfg %@ o,
)
I W W3~ A A 33l Mb2
[1 L
R INc. APny I
m.L-f
-M/l ne May 22, 1980 j/
, T
.f, J i
/
~
3 President Jimmy Carter The White flouse Washington, D.C.
Dear Mr. President:
A recurring question has come to mind ever since March 1979, when TMI became the 8th wonder of the world.
If a tornado touches down in Kansas, the President will declare the affected area a Federal disaster area, and Federal funds are made available to assist those in need.
If floods hit the Gulf Coast, Cuban refugees hit Florida, toxic chemical waste dumps are discoverd in New York or Mt. St. liciens blows it's lid in Washington State, those areas are proclaimed disaster areas, and Federal funding is provided.
My question is: Why shouldn't all the residents of South Central I Pennsylvania who were affected by mI and it's ramifications be eligible
' for Federal Assistance in view of the disaster that occured and is continuing
!to occur with respect to TMI, Met-Ed, CPU and the NRC?
Pennsylvanians have recently been infomed by the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission that they (the peopic) will be forced to bear the expense of re-furbishing TMI, the cost of replacement power purchased by Met-Ed, and any other clean-up activities. To my way of thinking, this is not fair to the thousands of Met-Ed customers who would not have found themselves in this situation had the Nuclear Regulatory Commission performed it's duties properly during the construction and initial operation of TMI !!!
I'm not suggesting that the Federal Government bail out a private entity. What might be a fair and practical way to handle the situation would be to allow an off-the-top deductica from one's Federal Income Tax for the amounts claimed by Met-Ed to be above and beyond what the normal service charges would have been had mI not experienced it's accident.
t *( ll e'I'I R A l'I'M e
WICI )l 31 NG H e
CONIhtlCIfCI A I, 12I I( )*I'O*I'V I 'lC HI ;'I'"I'I N( i Ol < A l *I IIC A 14*1'N HI 'lCCI A lll'Y l 'I R I N'I'I N( i L
I o
5/'
Your consideration of this question and your answer to it t
would be appreciated.
I sincerely thank you for your time and interest in the matter.
Very truly J rs,
,;=W Bruce E. Mervine A
i f
i e
IY