ML23062A699
| ML23062A699 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/02/2000 |
| From: | Mcburney R Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, State of TX, Dept of Health |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML23062A719 | List: |
| References | |
| Download: ML23062A699 (1) | |
Text
Financial Security:
Three Texas Case Studies or The Great Texas Security Chase Ruth E. McBurney, CHP Texas Department of Health
Case 1: The Case of the Missing Management In Situ Uranium Company in Decommissioning Type of Security: Trust Initial Amount: $17 million for closure of two sites
Case 1: The Case of the Missing Management Status:
Groundwater restored Wells plugged and abandoned Surface reclamation not complete
$1.2 million left in trust
Case 1: The Case of the Missing Management Summary of Activities and Issues Company has no assets other than trust Company B agreed to decommission site for remainder of trust after decommissioning 1999 - Letter stating that sites are clean; confirmation surveys showed excess contamination NORM (mine waste) vs. 5/15 pCi/g Ra standard Possible inappropriate use of trust funds TDH audit of past expenditures, refusal to reimburse until additional progress made
Case 1: The Case of the Missing Management Summary of Activities and Issues (Contd)
TDH can call in financial security if site is abandoned Company requested Trustee to release funds -- No TDH asked Trustee to release funds to TDH, since agency considered site abandoned -- No TDH asked assistance from Attorney Generals Office
Case 1: The Case of the Missing Management Recent Developments August 2000 - New attorney, new proposal to TDH:
- TDH releases approximately 1/3 of remaining trust
- Company B performs reclamation on behalf of company
- Work plan cost estimates of company not consistent with TDH estimates TDH referred matter to States Attorney Generals Office for action
Case Study 2: The Case of the Faltering Finances In situ uranium recovery company near bankruptcy Financial security: Bonds with guaranty company Total amount: $6.064 million Bonds held by two agencies:
- TDH - Groundwater restoration and surface reclamation
- TNRCC - Plugging and abandonment funds primarily
Case Study 2: The Case of the Faltering Finances Proposal Bonding company releases 18-month Agreement collateral back to company
- Uranium Company Bond reduction each quarter
- Bonding Company as groundwater restoration proceeds
- TDH
- TNRCC Approved restoration budget Additional investments for other company operations Status of company and U industry to be reviewed after 18 months
Case Study 2: The Case of the Faltering Finances Advantages Disadvantages Company can Concerns of local accomplish restoration activist groups and more economically County Company may avoid Commissioners bankruptcy Risk of reducing Restoration proceeds financial security more rapidly Unknown future
Case Study 2: The Case of the Faltering Finances Update Agreement signed by TDH and TNRCC on 9-15-00, all language agreed to 9-28-00 Local TNRCC inspector to inspect restoration activities regularly Bond reduction letter for first quarter
Case Study 3: The Case of the Reluctant Remittance Waste processing license Source manufacturing license Type and amount of current security:
Bond: $133,518 Decommissioning funding plan estimate (licensee): 1)None 2) $165,777 3)$304,632 4) $436,347 Cost estimate (TDH): $17,744,467
Case Study 3: The Case of the Reluctant Remittance History Financial security required for waste licenses since 1983 Waste license condition required $225,000 in 1990 New financial security rules in effect January 1995 for licensees Waste license under timely renewal
Case Study 3: The Case of the Reluctant Remittance History (contd)
NOV 10/1/96 for failure to have required amount of financial security and site decommissioning plan Company stated they had provided financial assurance and decommissioning plan Letter sent from agency regarding requirements for financial security for manufacturing license
Case Study 3: The Case of the Reluctant Remittance History (contd)
Additional NOVs for both licenses -
escalations of severity level Meeting at facility to discuss requirements for financial security Revised Decommissioning Funding Plan Agency found Decommissioning Funding Plan inadequate
- Based on material possessed, not authorized
- Hourly labor rates underestimated
Case Study 3: The Case of the Reluctant Remittance History (condt)
No submissions of additional financial security Referred to Attorney Generals Office 12/98 Meeting with licensee 2/99; tiered approach suggested to licensee Letter prepared to licensee with Agencys estimate, intent to propose to deny waste license renewal and modify manufacturing license 9/00
Case Study 3: The Case of the Reluctant Remittance Primary Issues Resolution of disputes on funding amounts Assumptions for decommissioning funding plan
- Disposal of GTCC waste
- Authorized material vs. normal possession
- Accounting for atomic number 3-83 authorization Training in cost estimates