ML20029A189
| ML20029A189 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 01/24/1991 |
| From: | Gody A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Treby S NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20029A190 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9102050026 | |
| Download: ML20029A189 (3) | |
Text
yte &[
,#p* *' cvq'o UNITE D sT ATEs g
ji e t *l g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
$""I E
W ASHINGT ON, D. C. 205%
January 24, 1991 MEMORANDUM FOR: Stuart A. Treby, Assistant General Counsel for Rulemaking and fuel Cyc1t-Office of the General Counsel FROM:
Antbony T. Gody, Chief Policy Development and Technict1 Support Branch Program Management, Policy Development and Analysis Staff Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulat ion
SUBJECT:
OGC REVIEW OF DECOMMISSIONING FUNDING PLANS We have completed our review of the decomissioning funding plans submitted by HRC power reactor licensees last July. As discussed in the enclosed status report, most licensees have complied with NRC regulations in il 50.33(k) and 50.75. Of the six that did not fully comply, two licensees' reports raise
-potential legal issues that we request OGC to evaluate.
First, the city of Tallahassee, Florida, a 1.33% owner of the Crystal River 3 plant, has structured its trust so that it is held by another part of the city government. Although ostensibly reserved solely for use for decommissioning costs, this approach seems to violate the definition of an external trust.
from Bob Wood.) ground material on this issue was sent earlier to Mike FinkelstaF (Note that back Additionally, would there be grounds to grant Tallahassee its requested exemption to allow this type of trust?
Second, Allegheny Electric Cooperative, a 10% owner of Susquehanna Units 1 & 2, has certified that it will provide decomissioning funds at a level consistent with the formulas specified in $50.75(c) and has established an external trust pursuant to $50.75(e). however, Allegheny has not made a specific statement of how it intends to fund its trust. Our interpretation of the decomissioning rule is that specific statements of funds collection were not required although licensees would be subject to periodic audit to assure that deposits were being made at a reasonable rate. This issue was raised by Joe Scinto in a memo (copy enclosed) dated June 26, 19S0. We did not pursue Joe's coments at that time because we wanted to review all submir-sions first to see whether A11egheny's approach was indicative of a more generic potential problem. We found it was not.
The contact for these issues is Robert Wood (x21255).
j
.thony T.
, Chie Policy Desel ment and T cbn cal Support Branch 9102050026 910124 Program Mi ement, Poli eyelopment PDR ADOCK OSO 7
and Analysis Staff P
Office of Huclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
As stat 3J L
cc:
L. Chandler, OGC S. Varga, NRR H. Silver, NRR M. Thadani, NRR n40093
/p' *%\\
UNIT [D sT AT[$
NUCLE AR REGUL ATORY COMMISSION
[ % j' i W4WNC10N D C M%
%..../
STATUS OF SUBftlSS10NS OF DECOMfilSS10NING FUNDING ASSURANCE PLANS AND CERTIFICATIONS As the initial step in providing financial assurance for decommissioning under Sections 50.33(t), 50.75, and 50.82, power reactor licensees were required to submit a decommissioning report by July 26, 1990, that contained a certification that such financial assurance will be provided in an amount at least equal to that stated in paragraphs 50.75(c)(1) and (2).
Licensees were also required both to provide assurance using one of the methods described in section 50.75(e) and to submit a copy of the financial instrument being used.
The required decommissioning reports have been received for all 122 operating and shutdown power reactors. Reports were received from 246 owners and co-owners of these ructors. Nearly all reports complied with the requirements of Part 50.
All but a few licensees chose to use a 5'nking fund held by an external trustee or escrow agent. The only Fedeial licensee chose to use a statement of intent aid two smaller co-owners bay ( used the prepayment method.
Of the-six licensees that did not fully comply, two lice *.rees did not include copies of executed trust agreements. Another licensee, a municipal co-owner, has its trust beld by another part of the city government, which apparently violates the requirement that trusts be external to the licensee. Another licensee did not formally certify that it would have necessary funds by the time of shutdown, although it established an external trust. Finally, o licensee proposes to rely on future tax credits, a form of internal reserve In addition, several licensees will require further NRC monitoring to assure that funds are being accumulated at an adequate rate. The Comission chose not to specify fund collection or amortization rates because such a function is considered to be u der the province of rate regulation that is the responsibility of the State public utility comissions (PUCs) and the Federal Energy Regulatory Comission (FERC). The roles of the PUCs and FERC were specifically addressed in the preamble to the decomissioning rule (53 FR 24018. June 27,1989;atpp24037-8). Several licensees either have not indicated the level of annual payments or have indicated that they have been making lower-than-expected annual payments into their external sinking fund trusts because they have not yet received authorization for full rate recovery from their PUCs or FERC. The staff intends to check these licensees periodically to be sure that funds are being collected at a reasonable rate.
'(1) The Comission responded to several Congressional requests to allow reliance on tax credits by reiterating its opposition to this approach. See identical letters dated August 15, 1990, from Chairman Carr to Representatives Hansen, Crane, Flippo, Schulze, Young, Donnelly, McGrath and Conte.
-._._m 2
Non power reactor _and materials licensees are also subject-to-the NRC's decommissioning rules.- Research and test reactor licensees'are required to submit cost' estimates for their facilities, indications of allowable funding methods, and~ descriptions of~the means of adjusting cost estimates end.
associated funding levels periodically over the life of the facility. The NRC received submittals from all of its 67 non-power reactor licensees. Most' licensees
- plan ~to use statements of intent, which are allowable funding mechanisms for State government entities such as State universities. The staff is.following up with 8_ licensees who either had deficiencies in their submissions or asked for partial exemption from NRC requirements.
ADD NMS$ INPUT HERE g1 9 L
L l=
I l
l L
=t.r y
o tv--g ygir--g-
+ ta v
weeyvvf p
ee----
gm-9m.f++-s--
T-ee---
r-*-e*
N
'