ML19351F101
| ML19351F101 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/11/1980 |
| From: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19295F134 | List: |
| References | |
| FRN-44FR45362, REF-10CFR9.7, RULE-PR-51, RULE-PRM-140-2 SECY-80-448, SECY-80-482, NUDOCS 8012290489 | |
| Download: ML19351F101 (13) | |
Text
JWBocch I
NRC 1
12/11/S0--
2nd 1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA trans.
.GC 9 3 2
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COM!iISSION
.3 4
Public Meeting s
5 AFFIRMATION SESSION 80-54 -- SECY-80-448 y
PROPOSED NARRATIVE EXPLANATION OF TABLE S-3; j
6 SECY-A-80-16 8, RULEMAKING IN 10 CFR PART 2; g
SECY-80-4 82, PROPOSED 'RULEMAKING FROM PUBLIC 6,
7 CITIZEN LITIGATION GROUP ON REQUIRED LEVELS OF FINANCIAL PROTECTION; AND DISCUSSION AND 8
VOTE OF AFFIRMATION ITEMS dd 9
bg 10 Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Comcissioners' Conference Room, j
11 1717 II Street, Northwest, B
Washington, D.C.
p 12 5
Thurs day, 11 December 19 80.
y 13 The meeting was convened, pursuant to notice, at
=
14 b
3:04 p.m.
2 15 5
BEFORE:
y 16 v5 JOllN F. AHEARNE, Chairman d
17 VICTOR GILINSKY, Commissioner PETER A. BRADFORD, Commissioner 18 JOSEPH M. IIENDRIE, Commissioner 5
{
19 ALSO PRESENT:
n 20 Samuel J.
Chilk, and Leonard Bickwit.
21 22 23 Tb 24 25 i 0
,1 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
1
DISm w Sis is an u=cfficial =a=sc:1p of a. -
cing af da Uni ad States Nuclaar Zagula:ory Cc -.dssion. held ca ram dw //; / TN i=. da Ccu-dzion's.officas a: 1717 E S::aa:, N. W., Wash 1=g't=n, D. C.
La maa:1=g was open to pubi d-at:andasca and obsa:racten.
31s.==~?c has see been reviewed, c== ac:ad, or edi ad, and
- ,= =ay c=n:21=. i= ace---= d ee.
~
na c:anscripe is i..:andad solely for ganaral d #c:=a:1cual purposes.
As p cvided by 10 CII. 9.103,1: is see part of da fo:=al or i=fs:=al record of decisics of da =a::ars discussed.
Impressicus of op1=1ce, i=..his =a=se:1pc dc :o secessarily raflac: final da a::=1=a:1cus or baliafs.
No plasd* g or c:har paper =ay be. filed vi:E da Co - '* sten i= a=7 procaad1=g as cha.
- ssul: of or add:assed :o a=7 sa: aman: or argu==== cen zined 5
hara1=, excape as the Cou:missicu =ay au:ho:Ua.
e e
e O
e O
~ ^
jwb J
2 1
EEEEEEE1Ngg 2
(3:04 p.m.)
3 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
The Commission returns to its 4
session.
We are going to work through some affirmation items.
s 5
The first one is one on which Commissioner Gilinsky had 8
6 abstained, so consequently I feel that we can go ahead and R
7 discuss that particular one.
Ml 8
MR. CHILK:
The first one is SECY-80-448, Proposed c.$
d 9
Narrative Explanation of Table S-3.
The Commission, with 10 the Chairman and Commissioner Hendrie approving, and i
j 11 Commissioner Bradford approving, except as noted in his 3
y 12 separate views; and Commissioner Gilinsky abstaining.
5 13 As approved, the ' Explanatory Na'rrative for S-3 l
14 and a proposed rule announcing the publication of the draft 2
15 Narrative, with a modification that we circulated to you this E
g 16 morning.
vs d
17 Mr. Bradford will provide his separate views, which 5
18 will be available three days before the deadline for publica-
=
19 tion.
k 20 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
And I hope well before that.
21 MR. CHILK:
Hopefully, well before that.
22 l
Mould you please affirm your votes?
23,
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Aye.
24 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Aye.
25 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Aye.
it i
}
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
jwb 3
1 MR. CHILK:
We will now need Commissioner Gilinsky.
2 CIAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Well, we will sit in recess.
3 (Recess.)
4 OIAIRMAN AHEARNE:
All right, we will go back in g
5 session.
8
@-6 We have two items to cover before we go into E
7 something we may need a closed meeting on.
Can I get an M
8 estimate of when my colleagues have to leave, sc I will know dd 9
when --
z'o
-~
10 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Well, we.' r.e. j us t af firming,-.
z...__
11 aren't we?
How long is that going to take?
S j
12 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Well, there are two potential 5
3 13 discussions.
m h
14 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Well, we've got these things a
{
15 listed.
Let's go on and do them.
m 16 g
OIAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Okay.
v5 g
17 CO!!MISSIONER GILINSKY:
And if it takes too long, 5
5 18 we'll leave.
E 19 (Laugh ter.)
20 QIAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Let's get an estimate of when you 21 l might have to leave?
22 I MR. CHILK:
He can't do that, because the last' 23 ;
one --
24 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I don't have any need to 25 '
leave.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
I
$wb 4
1 MR. CHILK:
SECY-80-16 8, which is the Rulemaking 2
to. incorporate in 10 CFR Part 2 APA's tiilitary and Foreign 3
Affairs Exeption to Adjudications.
4 Mr. Chairman, and Commissioner Gilinsky, and O
s 5
Commissioner Hendrie have approved the proposed rule change.
6 Conmissioner Bradford has disagreed with it, and has sent out R
7 a proposal which he has asked the Commissioners to address.
s-8 8
The Chairman and Commissioner Hendrie have replied do 9
to dhat, disagreeing.
Commissioner Gilinsky has not.
io 10 Do you stick with your original vote in the matter E
11 to approve the proposed rule dhange?
c 12 CO!1MISSIONER BRADFORD:
Now wait a minute, Sam.
E=
y 13 (Laughter. )
=
E 14 COtiMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Could you state it more de 9
15 neutrally than that?
E g
16 (Laughter. )
m p
17 tiR. CIIILK :
We 'll be able to move this along --
5 18 CO!1MISSIONER GILINSKY:
This is on the question --
~
=
19 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
It will push the Commission g
n 20 into error, again.
21 (Laugh ter. )
22 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Commissioner Gilinsky would like 23 to ask a question.
I 24 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
This is on the question of 25 hIwhether we ask for comment on the application of the rule to 6
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
jwb 5
1 l
1 to the Erwin case?
2 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Right.
That's correct.
3 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY :
I guess I'll g'o along with 4
that, unless Peter has some comments that he' d like to make.
5 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Well, I would have said --
e O
g 6
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY :
You might sway me.
R 8,.
7 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I would have said that Xl 8
those of us who favored an adjudicatory hearing on the last d
d 9
go-round would not need comnent as to what the outcome ought lo to be, even in the event that the Commission adopted a E
g 11 military and foreign affairs exception.
is y
12 In fact, my own position is based upon the fact that
=l 13 I prefer the adjudicatory hearing in any case, and theref' ore, a:
14 while I'm willing to have the Commission adopt a military and
{
15 foreign affairs exception, I just don't see any reason to
=
g 16 tangle that up in the Erwin case.
vs y
17 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Well, I guess that is 5
!E 18 logically right, but I don't really see an objection to having
=H" 19 people comment on it.
H 20 MR. CHILK:
Well, then, I would ask the Commission 21 to affirm their votes by 3 to 1 to approve the rule.
22 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Aye.
23 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Aye.
24 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Aye.
.I 25 i COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I am going to want to just ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
jwb 6
I stick a note in there saying what my views were, so don't 2
publish it until I have put in a sentence.
3 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
We ll, I assume that that means 4
you will do that reasonably soon?
e 5
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Yes.
E j
6 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Okay, Sam?
R d
7 MR. CHILK:
80-482, which is the Petition for Ml 8
Rulemaking from the Public Citizen Litigation Group on the dd 9
Required Levels of Financial Protection.
io 10 You will recall at the last meeting that the z
1
=
i j
11 Chairman and: Commissioner Hendrie had approved the staff y
12 recommendation to deny the petition.
Commissioner Gilinsky 5
13 then proposed a -- sent a memorandum suggesting exploration by
=
h 14 the Chairman of the willingness of insurers to increase the 2
15 liability coverage.
Commissioner Hendrie had no objection to 5
g 16 this.
The Chairman transmitted his own memorandum recommending us
{
17 the Commission deny the petition, and asking that OGC and the
=
18 staff to do certain work, and suggesting that Commissioner
=H
{
19 Gilinsky's separate views be attached.
Commissioner Bradford n
20
-tas preferred a rulemaking from the beginning.
21 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Sam, let me expand a minute.
22 I am still pretty unclear exactly on when I -- if 23 ;
I or the new Chairman would go to the insurers, the framework A
24j in which that approach would be made.
So what I have asked 25y!
is that -- what I would like is the General Counsel to look i
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
jwb 7
1 at our areas of responsibility, and 'for the staff to see if 2
they can't develop some linkage to the health and safety.
3 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
That seems to me pretty 4
simple.
I mean, there is something to be said for increasing e
5 the amount of insurance, as public servants, in getting the E
6 government out of the insurance business.
I don't think there R
7 is anything very mysterious' about this, or anything that we're Mf 8
going to discover by doing any study.
d
[
9 Now I think that if we decide to go forward, you 2
Og 10 will want to consult with them to see how you want to go about E
j 11 doing Snat, or in fact who it is you deal with, and I suppose a
j 12 the context would be lunch or dinner.
E j
13 (Laughter.)
m h
14 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Perhaps we can delegate that to 2
15 a --
5 g
16 (Laughter. )
M d
17 MR. CHILK:
Is that a policy matter?
5 5
18 (Laughter.)
=H h
19 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
It seems to me, I think i
a 20 actually that if we were to approach them -- well, the problem 21 with rulemaking is that the maximum amount of insurance you 22 get is what they're willing to give, to provide, so it is 23 ;
awkward without knowing what that is to fix it in a rule and i
24 say you're not going to let the reactors operate unless that 25 amount is available.
I l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
2
jwb 8
1 On the other hand, I think that if we would approach 2
them, they might well increase that amount, because my impres-3-
sion is that it's pretty much an arbitrary number.
So I --
4 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
You see this more as a jawboning a
5 than a.--
0 j
6 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY :
Yes.
R 7
CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
-- regulatory requirement.
N 8
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Yes.
Yes.
On the other d:!
9 hand, I think it could produce a useful result.
So I commend
- i O
10 it to you.
I think we ought to do it, and I think we oughtn' t E
g 11 to :just step back and say:
Well, you know, it's not clear is y
12 what the connection with our responsibilities are.
You know, 5
13 we could sidestep it; but on the other hand, there is an l
14 opportunity to make some improvements in the insurance 2
15 coverage.
And if we can persuade the insurers to provide more gl 16 insurance, I think we will have done something worthwhile, vs d
17 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
I guess I would like -- rather E
E 18 than going with an empty bow -- to see if I can't get a few 5
{
19 arrows in the quiver.
n 20 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Well, I'm not sure I know 21 what --
22 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
So I would prefer to first ask f
23 j to see if I can't get a little assistance from the General 24 Counsel in this matter.
25y COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Hell, if we can get three N
H 0
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
jwb 9
1 votea saying that you should go, I suppose you'11 have to go.
2 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Th at 's righ t.
3 (Laugh ter. )
4 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Or at least delegate an active g
5 chairman for insurance coverage.
O j
6 (Laughter. )
R 7
CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
But you' re right --
A j
8 cOfC4ISSIONER GILINSKY:
And you'll have to' keep us d
C 9
informed, too.
- iCg 10 (Laughter. )
I E
j 11 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
if it's the Commission 3
y 12 decision, then it's a Commission decision; that's correct.
- =l 13 So I guess the first issue, then, is:
What is the mg 14 Commission decision on whether or not the Chairman ought to be Ej 15 delegated to go and persuade the insurers to increase the
==
j 16 liability coverage?
v5 y
17 COfU4ISSIONER BRADFORD:
Well, let's see.
I would 5
{
18 agree with what I take to be the thrust of that, which is that i:
{
19 the agency ought to make a serious exploration of the potential n
20 for the increased liability coverage.
21 I don't necessarily insist that you personally --
22 l (Laughter. )
23,
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
But if it were put in terms i
24 of the agency undertaking to ascertain what the potential is,
25 i then I would be for it.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
jwb 10 1
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
That's really what I have 2
in. mind.
3 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Joe?
4 COINISSIONER HENDRIE :
Yes, and I think the correct e
5 way to phrase it is, "a serious exploration of the potential,"
8 6
because, you know, I think there is not piece of muscle, and R
7 I think indeed the staff people, counsel's office, who are Ml 8
insgrance -- have some familiarity with insurance business, and dd 9
so on, ought to be --
10 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
I guess, then, that is --
5 11 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
-- the appropriate thing.
is p
12 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
-- the decision:
3 to 1.
Og 13 MR. CHILK:
3 to 1.
a:
l 14 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
All right, the secc,'id item is C
15 the denial of the petition.
5 y
16 MR. Cl! ILK:
You have voted to deny the petition?
A l
d 17 Commissioner Hendrie has voted to deny the petition.
l 5
18 CO!MISSIONER GILINSKY:
I will vote to deny the 1
5 l
{
19 petition.
l 20 MR. CHILK:
You do not?
21 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:. I do not.
I would, as I said 22 in my separate views, institute a proceeding, not so much --
23 although it would be triggered by the petition, it really would 24 focus more on the comments of the California Energy Commission.
25l CHAIRMAN AIIEARNE:
All right.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
jwb 11 1
MR. CHILK:
Please, just -- Well, you've already 2
voted at the meeting.
That concludes --
3 CHAIR!iMI AHEARNE:
All right.
4 (Whereupon, at 3:13, the meeting was recessed, to s
5 consider further business.)
8 6
R E
7 j
8 e:i 9
si 10 m
a d
12 E
=i g
13
=
E 14
=
2 15 j
16 us 17 18
=
N 19 8n 20 21 22 23 24 25]
1 1
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the COM!!ISSION MEETING m
in the matter of: Public Meet-ng - Affirmation Session 30-54 --SECY-80-448 Proposed Narrative Explanation of "'able S-3; et al Date of Proceeding: December 11, 1980 Docket Number:
Place of Proceeding:
Mashington, D.
C.
were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the Commission.,
Jane N.
Beach Official Reporter (Typed)
[)
f f
f V,
lR l
a J &w t
Offi[a1 Reporter (Signature)
V
4 October 23, 1980 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM For:
The Comissioners From:
Harold R. Denton, Director r
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation-Thru:
Executive Director for Operations " ') '
Subject:
PETITION FOR RULE MAKING FROM PUBLIC CITIZEN LITIGATION GROUP ON REQUIRED LEVELS OF FINANCIAL PROTECTION Discussion:
On April 22, 1980, the Comission published a notice in the FEDERAL REGISTER (45 FR 26973) requesting public coment on a letter dated December 20, 1979 to the General Counsel of the Commission by the Public Citizen Litigation Group (PCLG).
The letter requested that the Comission amend 10 CFR 1140.11(a)(4) of its regulations to increase the amount of primary financial protection required of persons licensed to operate reactors with a rated capacity of 100 Mw(e) or more from $160 million to $460 million plus tne amount available as secondary financial protection.
The Comission directed that the letter be treated as a petition for rule making. Pertinent portions of the General Counsel's February 19, 1980 response to the PCLG letter were also published.
PCLG suggests that the insurance industry should be i
required to combine the $300 million in property insurance that it sells to reactor operators with l
the $160 million in primary liability insurance it provides to utilities under the Price-Anderson Act l
l to offer a combined level of liability insurance totaling $460 million? Eleven coment letters were l
received on this petition.
(Attachment"A") The m-a eight coments received from utilities, trade groups O E
- a, or associations, and from the insurance pools disagree with the petitioner's arguments that the jtw A availability of $300 million in property insurance indicates that the $160 million prescribed by the a hol'lllo p Comission is not the " maximum amount available" as required by the Act.
"This paper only accresses the insurance layers that are part of the overall limit of liability of $560 million.
For information concerning the staff's views on increasing or establishing a new limit of liability for the Price-Anderson Act, see SECY-80-471.
Contact:
Ira Dinit:
Ext. 492-8562 J
.D v
.- U S h
UNITED STATES
-....~'-- -
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'VASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 CuJSta..m CA. Lta.~m.p. 1paA N
m a
p S
=c e:
The :mmissicr.ers g
- rom
Jonn G. Davis, Director 07ce of Nuc'aar Materdal Safety arc ia'equarcs 5ru:
Executive Direct:r for ;cers-i ns Sutiect:
PRCPOSED NARRATIVE EXPLANATICU OF TABLE S-3 Furcose:
To transmit for Ccmmission review anc approval tne proposea narrative ex::ianati:n cf Tacia S-3 scecifisc in :na C:mmissi:n Cr:ar en :ne fina" f_6' :;;:a a.
2 arra:'.a, originally submitted as SECY-79-575, has been revised in response to Commission comments.
A draft Federal Register notice announcing the publication of tne draft narrat.ve and rules for its use is also submitted for approval.
Discussicn:
The changes requested in Mr. Chilk's memorancum dated May 13, 1980 (items 1 througn 10, on pages 2 and 3), have been incorporated in this revised narrative.
Based on a discussion with Dr. Buck,Section II of tne narrative also has been reorganized anc revised.
In general,Section II notes tnat the nonradioactive chemical effluents and liquid (cooling water) effiuents resu!:, for the most part, from the generation of electrical energy used in the nuclear fuel cycle by coal-firec pc,er a' ants.
Except to compare tne amount of iana cis urcea ta suopiy strip-r.inec coal to meet tne annual recuirements of a 1,000-MWe coal-firec power plant, the narrative does not compare the environmental considerations of ccal vs. nuclear because that issue is beyond the scoce of Table S-3.
Since licuid effluents are expressed in amounts and not concentrations of chemicals, rather than,aking a : mcariscn with E?A dr'nking satar stancarcs,Section II notes tna ciscnarges of licuic effluents to surface streams are n accorcance with.'lati:nal i
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Dermits issuec ty E?a. Or states.
C' Ju'y la. 1950. : e s:3" resecrse 5: C :--'4 s s i c ' e -
3r3C#t'3 ::.~ments "2girci'g nd 00P3er'/3 'im #e'i'1^t I:
3:ntaC :
"cTer.0'.wercerg, 'MS3 42-N2