ML20041C065
| ML20041C065 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 02/19/1982 |
| From: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Hochendoner L DAUPHIN COUNTY, PA |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20041C066 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8202260116 | |
| Download: ML20041C065 (1) | |
Text
'
m 6'k
..A 8
M' q Dock utsininuiluti:
Docket No. 50-320 RHVollmer i
b*3 4
nEC9 ROD.&
40, m * ***"*' k "
s 9
NRC PDR w/ incoming HThompson j
Local PDR w/ incoming PCheck p
FEB 2 51982%T EDO R/F BJSnyder nemmffME*h FEB 191982 TMIPO R/F LChandler, ELD S# %
C" 23 g M HRDenton PBrandenburg EGCase TERA w/incomin M
RDeYoung Olynch The Honorable Larry J. Hochendoner GCunningham, ELD RWeller Dauphin County Comissioners JSaltzman, SP WDTravers P.O. Box 1295 PPAS JCavanaugh Harrisburg, PA 17108 DEisenhut VSECY 83(3 l RMattson
Dear Mr. Hochendoner:
Chaiman Palladino has asked me to thank you for your January 26, 1982 letter containing infomation on your proposal for assuring financial resources to carry out the cleanup at Three Mile Island Unit 2 (TMI-2).
I understand you also had the opportunity to discuss your plan with the Comission's TMI-2 Advisory Panel at their January 28, 1982 meeting in Harrisburg.
It is obvious that your strategy has been well thought out.
l The fluclear Regulatory Comission unanimously shares your desire to see l
the TMI-2 cleanup completed safely and expeditiously.
In this agency's view, indefinite delays in getting on with the job increase the potential for adverse environmental and public health and safety consequences, Accordingly, the NRC is very anxious to see a resolution to the funda-i mental issue of cleanup financing. Since the Comission has no direct authority in decisions involving cleanup finance,. it has not endorsed any of the specific.pmposals which have been made to assure funding.
The Comission has, in a letter to.the Chaiman, Comittee on Govern-l mental Affairs, United States Senate (enclosed), noted the agency's basic agreement with the premise that funding from a combination of sources is probably the. most viable and equitable approach to take.
The Comission, however, would welcome any plan which would be imple-mented quickly to assure resources for a safe and expeditious cleanup.
In response to another point noted in your " Statement to Senator Mark Hatfield," the Comission believes that DOE should take responsibility for funding the removal and disposal of the entire damaged THI-2 reactor core. There is, in our view, much to be learned from the condition of the core that has safety ramifications appropriate for DOE study.
DOE action in this regard would also serve to eliminate one cleanup issue that at present contains great uncertainty.
Sincerely, Orid:ial Siped by H.P Denton Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
Ltr. to Chaiman, Comittee on Gf Phbb"NRR.,0SP WDbvers;ya]
0 DD:NRR D:NRR EDO a
dt 2/
bg BJSnyder JSal tzgan.
EGCase HRDenton 82 d60116 B20219 l;/82 2/;d2 2/ /82 2/ /82 2/ /e2 DRADOCK05000g
1 i
wasmuorou.c.w m.=
f' 0
g
'% o.,,
- e cxAmuAu Danuary 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 m'ade 'by the General Accounting Office (GAO) in its report entitled,
" Greater Commitment Needed to Solve Continuing Problems at Three Mile Island."
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, in response to the first GAO recommendation to NRC, notes that it has published.a prop'osed rule which would require power reactor licensees ~to maintain the maximum amount o-f commercially a'vailable onsite 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 Si billion.
If this *
level of coverage is not obtained'th~ rough the voluntary actions of the. industry, the Commission believes that such
. act' ion should be ma'ndated.
In response to the second GAO recommendation to NRC, the i
Commission has di'rected 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 GAO recommeniations to the NRC' are presented in Enclosure 1.
In addition, Commission comments relating.to other findings of the GAO study are presented in.
^
With respect to the present situation at Three Mile Island, the Commission will assure that NRC attention to TMI-2
\\
1
. H6norable; William V.~Roth, Jr..
cleanup efforts remains at a high level of priority u.ntil t,he problem is solved.
Sincerely.
~
/
4V g.g.p.
J. l 11adino Nunzi
~
En cl os u re's :
1.
Responses to GAO Recommendations-to the NRC 2.
Commission Comments on Other GAO Recommendations cc:
Sen. Tho'ma's F. Eagleton e -
e e
D e
e e
w
- we L
- m d a W +ee V-
RESPONSE TO'kICOMMENDATIONS TO NRC i
Item 1.
GAO Reedmmendation:
"Because another nuclear accident at an under-insured utility company could seriously affect public health and sa.fety, 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 progriss-being made.
This assessment should include an evaluation of the insurance' available 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 th'e 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 ac.tions in the insurance market worldwide and-is not de.termined 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 sev.eral months' that would cover cleanup costs, for damage comparable to that suffered at Three Mile I'sland -- that is, about 51 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 need for pro-perty insurance funds greater than that available f rom the insurers ' own reserves. If capacity.of some 51 billion or more cannot be developed vol-un ta ril y, the Commission believes that the retro-spective layer for such. insurance should also be made mandatory and.the Commission would seek legislation to accomplish this.
t
,,v,
~e,- - - - - - - -,
y
Y
~
.o Item.2.
GAO Recommendation:
"To mitigate future regulatory constraints on nuclear accident cleanup activities, t
we recommend that NRC establish a set of -guidelines that would f acilitate 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 effo.rts 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 technolog.' for decontaminating air and water affluent 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 Resoonse:
The Commission has -directed the NRC staff to proceed with an effort to develop the scope of guidelines which could f acilitate 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.
e Sg e
a I
i I
l e
l y
i f
. _..: s..
COMMENTS'ON OTHER"GAO RECOMMENDATIONS AND FINDINGS The Commission supports strongly the objective of a safe and expeditious cleanup at TMI-2.
To further this objective, we support the following GAO recommendations and findings involving other agencies:
Deoartment'of Enercy (DOE):
The Commission believes that 00E 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 TML waste is not commingled with military. wastes so that the issue of NRC regulation of military wastes need not.
,arise.
The Commission a.lso supports the current Executive Branch position that it is in the public interest for DOE to 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 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 inves,tigations of the TMI core.
. Electric Power Research Institute'(EpRI): We would support EPRI's use of utility and reactor manuf acturers' funds for research and duv.elopment at TMI-2.
If tf.es'e funds are
~
contributed to EPRI, the industry would gain val.uable insight into the effects of accidents and the behavior of
~~
reactor equipment..
El ectric. Utility Industry:
The C'ommission 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 allowing GPU to borrow from this insurance pool, with repayment'to be made over a multi-year. period.
The recent'cecommendation of e
the Ediso'n Electric Institute tha.t the utility industry provide about $1g0 million'toward cleanup as part of the proposal advocated by Governor Thornburgh could provide another important i n c.reme nt in cleanup funding.
Pennsvivania, New Jersey and GPU:
While recognizing that i t is ciscussing areas within the jurisdiction of the states, L
as part of a cooperative effort to provide for cleanup 1
1 0
m
-,,w..
w-e
-m m..,.
_, wyw v
.,w,-w
-w.
y
,--w
-v
l, 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]
Summarv:
With respect to financing the co-sts of the TMI-2 cleanup, the Commission agrees that the options set forth by GAO 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 tha NRC staff in its report " Potential Impact of Licensee Def ault on Cleanup of TMI-2," NU' REG-0689, November, 1980).
However, the Commission does not recommend any specific mix of funding sources.
Ifrespective of the ultimate form that TMI-2 cleanup funding take's, NRC is prepared to support expeditious actions consistent with ensur.ing public health and safety.
C u rr,e ntl y,
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 thac both actions would be necessary and should be strongly supported, i.e.,
allowing some por'. tion df TMI-2 clean-up costs to be recovered in rates and a reduction in stockholder return to help fund -ne clean-up.
e
.