ML20041A381
| ML20041A381 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 01/26/1982 |
| From: | Palladino N NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Roth W SENATE, GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20041A382 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8202220064 | |
| Download: ML20041A381 (6) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:_ ., pw ato u. je, UNITED STATES y c (* % NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION -{a
- g. E WA SHWGTON, D. C 205S5 1
% @ [pf ty
- ..+
CHAIRMAN 2anuary 26, 1982 The Honorable William V. Roth, Jr. Chairman, Committee on Governmental Affairs United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Mr. Chairman:
This letter responds.to the recommendations made by the General Accounting Office (GA0) in its report entitled, " Greater Commitment Needed to Solve Continuing-Problems at Three Mile Island." The Nuclear Regulatory Coc. mission, in response to the first GA0_ recommendation to NRC, notes that it has published.a prop'osed rule which would require power reactor licensees to maintain the maximum amount of commercially available onsite I property damage insurance. A voluntary insurance program may be available within the next several months that would cover cleanup costs for damage comparable to that. suffered at Three Mile Island -- that is, about $1 billion. If this level of coverage is not obtained through the voluntary actions of the industry, the Commission believes that such ~ action should be mandated. In response to the second GA0 recommendation to NRC, the Commission has directed its staff to develop the scope of guidelines to facilitate recovery efforts in the event of nuclear-related accidents. After evaluating the proposed scope, the Commission will decide whether to proceed further. Specific comments on the GA0 recommendations to the NRC'are presented in Enclosure 1. In addition, Commission comments relating.to other findings of the GA0 study are presented in. With' respect to the present situation at Three Mile Island, the Commission will assure that NRC attention to TMI-2 8202220064 820129 PDR CONNS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE PDR
Honorable William V."Roth, Jr. cleanup efforts remains at a high level of priority until the problem is solved. Sincerely, ,4cr. ,h f' &b -d i9? Nunzi J. @ 11adino E r. c l o s u r e s : 1. Responses to GA0 Recommendations ^ to the NRC 2. Commission Comments on Other GA0 Re commenda ti ons cc: Sen. Thomas F. Eagleton e o 9 4
1 Resp 0NSE TO RECOMMEbDATIONS TO NRC Item 1. GA0 Recommendation: "Because another nuclear accident at an under-insured utility company could seriously affect public health and safety, we recommend that NRC closely follow the current efforts of the insurance and utility industries to increase insurance coverage to what it determines to be an acceptable level. We further recommend that no later than December 31, 1981, NRC assess the progress being made. This assessment should include an evaluation of the insurance evailable in the private sector and a determination as to whether a mandated insurance coverage program is necessary." NRC Response: NRC has been and continues to monitor progress being made by the insurance and utility industries to increase insurance coverage that would pay onsite nuclear accident cleanup costs. While we expect to be able to provide an assessment of such progress, we suggest that the December 31 report due date be extended. The timing of developments and progress toward increas-ing this insurance coverage on a voluntary basis is dependent largely on actions in the insurance market worldwide and is not determined by NRC. ~ Concerned about the ability of a licensee'to finance the cleanup costs resulting from a nuclear-related accident, the Commission has proposed adoption of an interim rule which would require all licensees for generating power reactors to maintain the maximum amount of commercially available onsite property damage insurance or an equivalent amount of protection. Based on what we have learned thus far from the insurers, we expect that a voluntary insurance program will be avail-able within the next several months'that would cover cleanup costs for damage comparable to that suffered at Three Mile Island -- that is, about $1 billion. The increased capacity of the property and cleanup insurance is based to a major extent on utilities agreeing to a retrospective assess-ment of premiums in the event of a neec for pro-perty insurance funds greater than that available from the insurers' own reserves. If capacity of some $1 billion or more cannot be developed vol-untarily, the Commissiar believes that the retro-spective layer for suc1 insurance should also be made mandatory and the Commission would seek legislation to accomplish this.
Item 2. GA0 Recommendation: "To mitigate future regulatory constraints on nuclear accident cleanup activities, we recommend that NRC establish a set of guidelines that would facilitate the development of recovery procedures by utility companies in the event of other nuclear reactor accidents. The preparation of the guidelines should be initially based on the lessons learned and experience gained from the TMI-2 cleanup and recovery efforts at other nuclear installations. Because a number of years may pass before another comparable accident occurs, NRC should periodically assess the adequacy of its guidelines and standards and evaluate the state-of-the-art technology for decontaminating air and water effluent produced by a nuclear accident to ensure that it can quickly respond to the needs of the regulated utility and adequately protect the public health and safety." NRC Response: The Commission has directed the NRC staff to proceed with an effort to develop the scope of guidelines which could facilitate recovery efforts in the event of nuclear-related accidents at other operating power plants. A review of this initial effort will be made to determine whether to proceed with further development of appropriate guidelines. f
i COMMENTS ON OTHER'GA0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND FINDINGS 4 The Commission supports strongly the objective of a safe. and expeditious cleanup at TMI-2. To further this objective, we support the following GA0 recommendations and findings involving other-agencies: ' Department of Enercy (DOE): The Commission believes that l DOE should take custody of the' radioactive waste generated during the TMI-2 cleanup which is unsuitable for commercial shallow land disposal. The Department should ensure that the TMI waste is not commingled with military-wastes so that the issue of NRC regulation of military wastes need not arise. The Commission also supports the current Executive Branch position that it is in the public interest for DOE to i provide significant funding to be expended at TMI-2 on research and development. Also, if the DOE were to take responsibility for the removal and disposal of the entire damaged reactor core as well as the radioactive wastes, it could aid one element of the cleanup that at present contains great uncertainty. There is much to be learned from the 1 conditions of the TMI-2 core that has safety ramifications appropriate for DOE study. Furthermore, only DOE (and its contractors) has the technical capability to carry out investigations of the TMI core. t ~ i Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI): We woul4 support EPRI's use of utility and reactor manufacturers' funds for research and development a t TMI-2. If thes~e funds are contributed to EPRI, the industry would gain valuable insight into the effects of accidents and the behavior of reactor equipment. Electric Utility Industry: The Commission supports the
- formation of a property damage insurance pool to cover the cost of cleanup and repair of nuclear plants in the event of an accident in the future. We would not object to allo, wing GPU to borrow from this insurance pool, with repayment to be made over a multi-year period.
The recent' recommendation of the Edison Electric Institute that the utility industry 1 provide about $190 million toward cleanup as part of the proposal advocated by Governor'Thornburgh could provide another important inc.rement in cleanup funding. Pernsylvania, New Jersey and GPU: While recognizing that it is discussing areas within the jurisdiction of the states, as part of a cooperative effort to provide for cleanup h a
funding we would have no objection to measures such as allowing recovery of some portion of TMI-2 cleanup costs in the rate base.[1] Summary: With respect to financing the costs of the TMI-2 cleanup, the Commission agrees that the opticns set forth by GA0 represent a reasonable range of choices and that some combination of sources of funds is probably the most viable and equitable approach to take (see also the options dis-cussed by the NRC staff in its report " Potential Impact of Licensee Default on Cleanup of TMI-2," NUREG-0689, November, 1980). However, the Commission does not recommend any specific mix of funding sources. Irrespective of the ultimate form that TMI-2 cleanup funding takes, NRC is prepared to support expeditious actions consistent with ensuring public health and safety. Currently, we maintain professional staffs, located at both headquarters and the TMI site, who are dedicated to quick reviews of cleanup proposals made by the licensee. The Commission will ensure that this kind of NRC attention to TMI-2 cleanup efforts remains a high priority in this agency throughout the cleanup. [1] Mr. Ahearne would also have no objection to appropriate agencies continuing to allow GPU to defer dividends on common stock. He believes that both actions would be necessary and should be strongly supported, i.e., allowing some por: tion of TMI-2 clean-up costs to be recovered in rates and a reduction in stockholder return to help fund the clean-up. .}}