ML20147B374
| ML20147B374 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/03/1978 |
| From: | James Keppler NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Mandel R AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20147B380 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7810110001 | |
| Download: ML20147B374 (4) | |
Text
7 l
4
.7 NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION f
el
.j R EGloN ill
$ j4 [
-j r 799 moose vf LT moAo n
e GLE N E LLYN, ILLINoK 6007 OCT 0 31978 Richard and Lois Mandel 546 Provident Winnetka, IL 60093 Dear Richard and Lois Mandel' l
Ia responding to your recent letter (undated) concerning a
" Transportation Accident Involving Nuclear Fuel." Your specific questions are answered in the enclosure to this letter.
Your questions appear to be based on "a hypothetical case of a j
ruptured cask."
The performance requitecents in the NRC regula-tions covering the fabrication and use of casks for the shipment of spent (irradiated) nuclear fuel are designed to prevent the rupture of casks in normal or accident conditions of transport.
While it is true that some " accidents have occt.cred" involving
" trucks and trailers carrying spent nuclear fuel," in no case has there been any breach of cask containment integrity nor any release of the radioactive contents. Further, spent fuel casks were tested at Sandia Laboratories under a contract with the Department of Energy, A truck carrying a spent fuel cask was impacted on an unyielding concrete block at a speed of about 80 ciles per hour.
Similar tests were conducted with a rail car carrying a spent fuel cask.
Test results showed that the casks maintained their integrity; none ruptured even though they suffered some external damage.
I agree that it is important that the public be inforced about the public interest considerations pertaining to the Price-Anderson Act.
In 1974 and 1975, the Congress held extensive public hearings on the Price-Anderson extension and a record expressing many views on the subject was developed before Congress voted on the ten-year extension.
4 I
. DCT 0 31978 I trust that the enclosure fully answers your questions and that this letter alleys your concerns about spent fuel casks.
Sincerely, 39 h. '
/JamesG.KeppEr Director
Enclosure:
Questions and Answers cc w/ enc 1:
Leo B. Higginbothat, IE
/entralFiles Reproduction Unit NRC 20b PDR v
cw
-m..
t i
ENCLOSUPI l
l Question: Please consider a hypothetical case of a ruptured cask.
If my family and I were lucky enough to escape without injury from radioactivity but were forced to leave our home, our jobs, and our schools for a month or a year (both are conceivable),
how much damage could we collect? How would it be determined?
Answer:
If the cask were being use for the transport of nuclear fuel to or from an indemnified facility (e.g., a nuclear power plant), the provisions of the Price-Anderson Act assure a source of funds for liability for personnal injury or property damage resulting from such a transportation accident.
Pro-visions exist between the insurance pools and the Federal Goverment under the Act for the prompt payment of up to $64 million in claims without signing a vaiver for further claims.
The total amount of liability would be established, ultimately, in the courts to the degree that the claims cannot be resolved by the insurance companies, the Government and the claimants.
Qu es tion: Does the Price-Anderson Act cover transportation accidents?
I thought Price-Anderson only cover each reactor for $560 million.
What if there are a hundred thousand people in my city or maybe a million that have to be evacuated? Are all of these people covered? The damage could run into billions.
)
i What if there is death involved.
How does the insurance cover that?
Would it be necessary to sue both the utility and the Federal Government?
Answer:
The Price-Anderson Act provides liability coverage for trans-portation of nuclear fuel to an from indemnified facilities.
The $560 million is the present limit of liability for each nuclear incident (the term " incident" as used in the Price-Anderson Act is synonymous with " accident").
The liability coverage for the nuclear incident would extend to all people suffering personal injury or property damage.
The liability coverage includes claims of survivors if death occurs as a result of a nuclear accident.
In the event of
_2 ENCLOSURE an accident in which the liability exceeds $560 million, Congress expressed in the Act that it would consider what additional relief should be provided.
If an accident were to occur, claims would be brought against The Federal Government's role would be to the utility.
provide funds called for by the Price-Anderson Act in excess k'e doubt that it of those provided by the insurance pools.
would be necessary to bring suit against the utility and the Government.
l
. ~.... - -..
/
Mr. James Kepple r Manager Region 5 Nuclear Regulatory Comm.
799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois
Dear Mr. Keppler:
RE:
TRANSPORTATION ACCIDENT INVQLVING NUCIEAR FUEL:
Since trucks and trailers carrying spent nuclear fuel traverse our highways daily, and since accidents have occurred, many questions do arise.
If a truck has an accident in which the cask carrying spent fuel is ruptured - and there is a great release of radioactivity, causing an entire city to be evacuated, WHO WOULD COMPENSATE THE EVACUEES?
This question was put to George Travers of Commonwealth Edison. Also the question, why do all home-owner insurance policies contain a nuclear exclusion clause?
He replied that nuclear incidents - notice he didn't use the word accidents - were already covered by a no-fault insurance program paid for by the utilities and the Federal Government.
Pleara consider a hypothetical case of a ruptured cask.
If my family snd I were lucky enough to escape without injury from radioactivity but were forced to leave our home, our jobs and our schools for a month or a year (both are conceivable), how much damage could we collect?
How would it be determined?
Does the Price-Anderson Act cover transportation acci-dents? I thought Price-Anderson only covered each reactor for $560 million.
What if there are a hundred thousand people in my city of maybe a million that have to be evacuated? Are all of these people covered? The damage could run into billions.
What if there is death involved? How does the insurance cover that?
Would it be necessary to sue both the utility and the Federal Govt?
The public should be better informed about these pertinent qu,estions. Do you not agree? Please Answer.
Sincerely, f
(
f)pg Name Address g g g g p u
?
.,1 e jgg YAns k w k h8093
- - -. --..-