[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Reid challenges Price Anderson Act



Christy Brinkley?? isn't anyone just amazed that the Senate would actually invite a model to talk about nuclear power... maybe they will invite George Clooney when they talk about health care issues.  How can anyone take such a panel seriously??





Patricia A. Milligan, RPh.,CHP

USNRC

301-415-2223



>>> Norman Cohen <ncohen12@HOME.COM> 01/24/02 12:44PM >>>

Of course, there's politics involved. Reid is going to use his power at the #2

guy in the Senate to try to block Yucca Mountain or to cut a deal that would

benefit Nevada. Its the cutting of deals that should concern people on all sides

of this issue.



Norm





> http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/2002/Jan-24-Thu-2002/news/17940904.html";>

> http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/2002/Jan-24-Thu-2002/news/17940904.html</A>

> =======================================================

> January 24, 2002

> Las Vegas Review-Journal

>

> NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS: Reid challenges insurance program

> Law enacted in '50s for young industry criticized by some as crutch

>

> By STEVE TETREAULT

> STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU

>

> WASHINGTON -- Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., on Wednesday challenged a

> government-backed insurance program that could leave taxpayers liable to pay

> claims from catastrophic accidents at nuclear power plants.

>

> Reid said it may be time for fundamental changes in the Price-Anderson Act,

> enacted in 1957 as a safety net for the then-fledgling nuclear power industry

> but now criticized by some as a crutch. The industry defends the insurance

> system as crucial to its workings.

>

> "The generation and selling of electricity are very different today than 50

> years ago," Reid said at a hearing of the Senate's nuclear safety

> subcommittee. "A new electricity market demands a new Price-Anderson system."

>

> Reid, the panel's chairman, invited testimony from government and industry

> witnesses, and actor-model Christie Brinkley, who sits on the board of

> Standing for Truth About Radiation, an anti-nuclear group on Long Island,

> N.Y.

>

> Brinkley said as a mother of three living in the vicinity of three nuclear

> reactor stations, she is concerned about safety, and beyond that the ability

> of the nuclear industry to come up with adequate funds to pay claims in the

> event of a catastrophic accident.

>

> "This discussion today is really about an industry owning up to its

> responsibilities," Brinkley said. Reid praised her testimony "because you

> speak for a lot of people."

>

> Reid said afterwards he plans to hold more hearings on the Price-Anderson Act

> before deciding on a course of action this year.

>

> The current law expires in August. If the law expires, coverage would

> continue for 103 commercial nuclear plants now operating, but government

> backing would not be available for new facilities.

>

> Nevadans have taken interest in the act because it also covers accidents at

> government nuclear facilities, including the radioactive waste repository

> under consideration for Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.

>

> Another controversial part of the law indemnifies government contractors

> involved in nuclear accidents, even if they are found to be negligent. It

> would cover contract operators of a nuclear waste repository and

> transportation firms involved in shipping radioactive materials to a

> repository.

>

> Price-Anderson requires nuclear plant operators to buy $200 million in

> primary insurance per reactor, plus secondary insurance up to $88 million per

> reactor that is put into an industry pool. The pool currently totals $9.5

> billion and is to cover potential accidents at commercial plants and

> government nuclear weapons facilities.

>

> The law requires Congress to step in, and presumably tap taxpayer funds, to

> cover damages above $9.5 billion.

>

> Reid said the private insurance pool may be too small, citing a 1986 General

> Accounting Office report stating costs of a nuclear accident could total

> "hundreds of billions depending on which way the wind is blowing."

>

> He also questioned why the government gets behind insurance for nuclear power

> when it doesn't extend the same treatment for other energy forms.

>

> "The nuclear power industry moved through adolescence and has not settled

> into a comfortable middle age," he said. "It no longer needs the federal

> government to nurture it."

>

> Peter Bradford, an energy lecturer at Yale University and a former member of

> the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said Price-Anderson is "anti-competitive."

>

> As long as their accident liability is limited, companies have fewer

> incentives to explore safer designs, he said.

>

> "It provides a subsidy to nuclear power plants compared to other sources of

> electricity and renewables and even between nuclear power plant designs,"> Bradford said. New designs that might be inherently safer don't enjoy an

> advantage because all would be treated the same under the law, he said.

>

> Bradford suggested calculating the monetary value of Price-Anderson to the

> nuclear industry and then offering an equivalent amount to alternative fuels

> that are "in the startup phase," where nuclear power was 45 years ago when

> Price Anderson was established.

>

> Marvin Fertel, a senior vice president for the Nuclear Energy Institute,

> disputed the notion the nuclear industry enjoys a subsidy. Power companies,

> and by extension their ratepayers, bear the cost of insurance, he said.

>

> Fertel also argued no other energy provider is required to buy insurance as

> the nuclear power industry is. "Risks of dam failure and flooding at

> hydroelectric facilities are borne directly by the public, not the hydropower

> facilities," he said.

>

> At one point, Fertel was talking about nuclear plant workers being concerned

> about safety when Reid interrupted.

>

> "Doesn't Homer Simpson work in a nuclear plant?" he asked.

>

> "Homer Simpson works in Hollywood," Fertel responded.

>

> =========================================================

>







************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/ 



************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/