ML20046B510
| ML20046B510 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/22/1993 |
| From: | Curtiss NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9308040315 | |
| Download: ML20046B510 (2) | |
Text
"I
- l l
RELEASED TO THE PDR NOTATION V0TEj gg93 4
l 1
e ate <
ir a 3
\\
RESPONSE SHEET T0:
SAMUEL J. CHILK, SECRETARY OF THE COMISSION i
FROM:
C0mISSIONER CURTISS l
SUBJECT:
SECY-93-127 - FINANCIAL PROTECTION REQUIRED OF LICENSEES OF LARGE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS DURING DEC0lWISSIONING X/with APPROVED comments DISAPPROVED ABSTAIN j
i Nor PARTICIPATING REQUEST DISCUSSION,
j COMENTS:
I See attached comments.
1 l
l D
COM S N b
j CORRESPONDENCE PDR, RELEASE VOTE
/ X/
June 22, 1993 WITHHOLD VOTE
/
/
l ENTERED ON "AS" YES x
NO i
j y,
i I
. ~.. _
Commissioner Curtiss' comments on SECY-93-127:
My comments on the recommendations contained in SECY-93-127 follow:
1.
On the question of " rated capacity," I agree that we l
can reasonably interpret the statute to allow a finding l
that a facility does not have a " rated capacity of l
100,000 electrical kilowatts or more" when the NRC
~
issues the possession-only license (POL) or takes other licensing action that removes the authorization to l
operate for the permanently-shutdown facility.
Since l
such a determination is necessary in order for the NRC to consider reducing primary coverage requirements, I believe that the Commission should formally codify a finding that "a facility will be deemed not to have a rated capacity of 100,000 electrical kilowatts or more when the NRC issues a POL or takes other licensing action that removes the authorization to operate for the permanently-shutdown facility."
I would suggest l
that this codification be a part of the rulemaking that l
the staff undertakes in addressing " Issue 2" below.
2.
On Issue 1, I approve Option B, which provides that I
after the requisite minimum spent fuel cooling period to proclude a zirconium fire has elapsed, the Commission would allow licensees of permanently shutdown large power reactors to withdraw from participation in the secondary financial protection layer.
I do not see a need to seek an opinion from the Attorney General on this approach.
3.
On Issue 2, I approve Option A, which provides that after the requisite minimum spent fuel cooling period to preclude a zirconium fire has elapsed, the Commission will issue exemptions to reduce the amount of primary financial protection to something on the order of $60 million to $100 million or such other amount as individual licensees might justify.
In parallel, the staff should proceed with rulemaking to codify the finding on " rated capacity" and the spent fuel cooling period, and ascertain an appropriate level of reduced primary coverage.
The Commission should also revisit the question of primary coverage for ISFSIs.
.