|
on Nuclear Pollution VT .
NH . ME .
MA . RI .
CT . NY - POST OFFICE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASESept. 10, 2011
---------------- Contact:
Raymond Shadis - 207-882-7801
Cell-
207-380-5994
Clay Turnbull (NEC)- 802-257-0336
Cell- 802-380-4462 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE NRC REAFFIRMS THAT ENTERGY VY WILL HAVE SUFFICIENT FUNDS TO
DECOMMISSION IN 2012 On September 8, 2011, the US Nuclear regulatory Commission issued a
proposed Director’s Decision on a 2009 enforcement petition updating and
reaffirming findings the agency made in 2010 that there is adequate assurance
that Entergy Vermont Yankee will have sufficient funds to begin
decommissioning in 2012. The NRC staff
documented the resolution of decommissioning funding assurance in a letter
dated February 19, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML 100431486): Based on the
information provided by Entergy on January 28, 2010, the NRC staff finds that
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station as of September 30, 2009, had a
Decommissioning Trust Fund Balance of $419.8
million. Entergy established a Parent Company Guarantee in the amount of $40
million by December 31,2009, to provide additional
financial assurance. NRC staff has determined that the Trust Fund Balance, projected
to the time of permanent cessation of
operations in 2012, plus the verification of a
Parent Company Guarantee will cover the projected shortfall. [Emphasis added] This affirmation came in a September 8, 2011 NRC letter to Mr. John F. McCann, Vice President Nuclear Safety, Emergency Planning and Licensing Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. and Mr. Sherwood Martinelli's , a New York resident who had requested that NRC enforce its decommissioning fund assurance requirements against several Entergy nuclear plants and sanction the company for making false statements regarding its accumulation of funds. Mr.Martinelli’s petition was originally filed in August 2009, and amended in December 2009. NRC’s letter to McCann and Martinelli offered an opportunity for the petitioner and company to comment before the decision becomes final. NRC’s draft decision concluded that no further agency action was warranted in part because of improvements made by the company in decommissioning funding assurance, such as Vermont Yankee’s $40 million Parent Company Guarantee of funds. Entergy
Nuclear Vermont Yankee sought to dismantle that fund earlier this year based
on NRC’s renewal of its federal license.
NRC refused permission based on the fact, it said, that New England Coalition technical advisor, Raymond Shadis, said, “NRC has made it clear that nothing stands in the way of prompt decommissioning starting in 2012.” Shadis added that based on his first-hand eight-year experience in the Maine Yankee Atomic Power Station decommissioning that “NRC’s method for projecting radiological decommissioning costs has it about right.” Further, Shadis said expenditures trend upward as decommissioning progresses, so the bulk of Entergy VY’s invested decommissioning fund can remain untouched and earning money until decommissioning is well-on. The company can recapture shortfalls, he said, through wholesale tariffs on VY electricity before the plants closes and on other Entergy nuclear plants after VY closes. Shadis was the only non-governmental environmental and nuclear safety advocate directly involved in the Maine Yankee decommissioning; representing the citizens group, Friends of the Coast; working on a week-to-week basis with Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company and Entergy executives, technicians, and engineers on issues such as residual radiation standards, on and offsite radiation surveys, chemical pollution, component decontamination, demolition debris disposal, and spent nuclear fuel safeguards and security. In 2000, Maine Yankee adopted what it touted as the strictest nuclear cleanup standards in the nation and credited Shadis’ “relentless” advocacy for bringing the company to that decision. END NRC’s Letter is attached in PDF format and Excerpts are appended below for Background. NRC
Proposed [Findings and] Decision (NRC Background
In 10 CFR 5O.7S(f)(1) and (2), the NRC
requires power reactor licensees to report decommissioning funding assurance
information to the NRC at least once every 2 years. The NRC received the
"first reports on March 31, 1999. Required information includes the
following: •
the
amount of decommissioning funds estimated to be required pursuant to 10 CFR
SO.7S(b) and (c); •
the
amount of funds for radiological decommissioning accumulated as of the end of
the most recent calendar year preceding the date of the report; •
a
schedule, if any, of the annual amounts remaining to be collected; •
the
assumptions used in determining rates of escalation in decommissioning costs,
rates of earnings on decommissioning funds, and rates of other factors used
in funding projections, with proper documentation; •
any
contracts upon which the licensee is relying pursuant to 10 CFR
SO.7S(e)(1)(v); •
any
modifications occurring to a licensee's current method of providing financial
assurance since the last submitted report; and •
any
material changes to trust agreements. Licensees must estimate the minimum funding amount needed for
radiological decommissioning by using the formulas included in 10 CFR
SO.7S(c). As an alternative, licensees may also use a site-specific
methodology to determine the funding needed, provided that the amount is
greater than the decommissioning cost estimate using the 10 CFR SO.7S(c)
formulas. Entergy submitted the status
of decommissioning funding for the year ending December 31,2008,
by two separate letters dated March 30, 2009 (ADAMS Accession No. ML090920576
for the facilities in NRC Regions I and III, and ADAMS Accession No.
ML090920218 for the facilities in NRC Region IV). The NRC staff's review of the
decommissioning status reports resulted in the identification of projected
shortfalls at the following Entergy facilities:
The agency asked Entergy to
provide a written plan of action following NRC staff notification to indicate how it would meet its minimum funding assurance level for each of the facilities listed above. Entergy responded to the staff's requests, and questions about decommissioning funding assurance have been resolved for each of the above facilities. The staff's findings [for Vermont Yankee] are summarized below. The NRC staff documented the resolution of decommissioning
funding assurance in a letter dated February 19, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML 100431486): Based on the information provided by Entergy on January 28, 2010,
the NRC staff finds that Vermont
Yankee Nuclear Power Station as of September
30, 2009, had a Decommissioning Trust Fund Balance of $419.8 million. Entergy established a Parent
Company Guarantee in the amount of $40 million by December 31, 2009, to
provide additional financial assurance. NRC staff has
determined that the Trust Fund Balance, projected to the time of permanent
cessation of operations in 2012, plus the verification of a Parent Company
Guarantee will cover the projected shortfall. [Emphasis added] Conclusion …Based upon a case-by-case
review of each licensee's response, the staff concludes that all Entergy
facilities have provided reasonable assurance that sufficient funding for
radiological decommissioning of their respective facilities will be available
at the time of permanent termination of operation. Based on the above discussion, the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation has denied the Petitioner's request to suspend the operating licenses of the Entergy facilities having projected shortfalls in their decommissioning trust funds, as well as to deny the Petitioner's request that the NRC take certain actions to ensure that any shortfalls in the decommissioning trust funds be rectified and other actions to ensure the integrity of the decommissioning trust funds. These actions included suspension of all licensing actions for Entergy facilities, ordering immediate actions by Entergy to redress the projected shortfalls, and the implementation of daily fines until such time as adequate funds are deposited to make the decommissioning funds fully whole… Vermont Yankee
Nuclear Power Station The NRC staff
documented the resolution of decommissioning funding assurance in a letter dated February 19, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML 100431486): Based on the
information provided by Entergy on January 28,2010,
the NRC staff finds that Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station as of September
30, 2009, had a Decommissioning Trust Fund Balance of $419.8 million. Entergy
established a Parent Company Guarantee in the amount of $40 million by
December 31,2009, to provide additional financial
assurance. NRC staff has determined that the Trust Fund Balance, projected to
the time of permanent cessation of operations in 2012, plus the verification
of a Parent Company Guarantee will cover the projected shortfall. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This announcement
was sent to by New England Coalition (NEC). If you wish to
update your mail address or to be removed from our private email list please
email us at necnp@necnp.org or call
us at 802-257-0336. Thank you. NEW
ENGLAND COALITION has engaged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Entergy
Nuclear Vermont Yankee in a non-stop litigation sparring match since 2001 and
that continues in 2011: Entergy v. VT (Federal Preemption claimed by
Entergy case) , NEC and State of Vermont v. NRC (NRC should
rescind their approval of Entergy’s license renewal application (LRA).
Vermont Yankee has not applied for or received all state water pollution
control permits which are a prerequisite for NRC approval of the license
renewal). Friends
of the Coast and NEC are joint intervenors opposing the application of
NextEra Seabrook for a 20 year
extension of its federal license, due to expire in 2032. Admitted for
litigation are Friends/NEC contentions that Seabrook below ground
safety-related cables are susceptible to flooding but not designed or rated
for underwater service; and that Seabrook’s severe accident mitigation
analysis are biased toward making potential accidents look less dangerous
that they would truly be. Friends/NEC says it is apparent that these
considerations (flooding of electrical cables and accident mitigation
measures) have played heavy in the Fukushima tragedy. Friends/NEC now
contends that the course and effects of the Fukushima accident must be
studied before NRC can validate either the environmental and safety
advocate’s concerns or the nuclear industry’s reassurances regarding designs
to be licensed or relicensed. Contact Raymond Shadis shadis@prexar.com 207-882-7801 (answers in Spanish) or
207-380-5994 (Cell) for additional information specific to legal and
regulatory initiatives. NEC,
organized and founded in 1971, is the region’s sole advocate for
environmental and nuclear safety with intervenor status in the Entergy
Vermont Yankee federal relicensing process, and is an intervenor in two open
dockets before the Vermont Public Service Board Docket 7440 – Shall Entergy
Nuclear Vermont Yankee receive a CPG for an additional 20 years of operation
and less widely reported Docket 7600 which resulted from an action brought by
Conservation Law Foundation regarding the tritium leaks at VY. New
England Coalition
is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization. All
contributions are tax-deductible and urgently needed. The unprecedented
number of concurrent cases in which we are intervenors or amicus curiae in
2011 and the pace of developments in these cases make your contribution today
so important. Donate at necnp.org using
PayPal
or send a check to NEC, PO Box 545, Brattleboro , VT 05302 www.necnp.org
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR
REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C.
20555-0001 September 8, 2011 Mr. John
F. McCann, Vice President Nuclear Safety, Emergency Planning and Licensing Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. 440 Hamilton Avenue White Plains,
NY 10601 Dear Mr. McCann: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC} staff has reviewed Mr. Sherwood Martinelli's
petition dated August
22, 2009, as amended on December 22 and 28, 2009.
The NRC staff's proposed Director's Decision under Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR} 2.206,
"Requests for action
under this subpart," is enclosed. I request
that Entergy Nuclear
Operations, Inc. (the licensee}, provide comments to me on any part of the proposed Director's Decision that the licensee believes to be erroneous,
or any issues in the petition that the licensee believes have not been addressed. The NRC staff will review any comments provided by the licensee
and consider them
in preparing the final version of the Director's Decision. The licensee will have no further
opportunity to comment. Please provide
your comments within
30 days of the date of this letter. Sincerely,
><J h G. Giitter, Director vision of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-271 and 50-458 Enclosure: Proposed Director's Decision cc: Listserv ENCLOSURE PROPOSED DIRECTOR'S DECISION ACCESSION NUMBER
ML101100607 DD-11-XX UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF NUCLEAR
REACTOR REGULATION Eric J. Leeds,
Director In the Matter of ) ) Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. ) ) ) River Bend Station
) ) ) ) Vermont Yankee Nuclear
Power Station ) )
Docket No. 50-458 License No. NPF-47 Docket No.
50-271 License No.
DPR-28 PROPOSED DIRECTOR'S
DECISION UNDER 10 CFR 2.206 I.
INTRODUCTION By electronic transmission dated August
22, 2009 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML092400492), as supplemented
by electronic transmissions on
December 22 (ADAMS Accession No. ML093620029) and December 28, 2009 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML093641014), Mr. Sherwood Martinelli, the Petitioner, filed
a petition pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR)
2.206, "Requests for
action under this subpart," to Mr. R. W. Borchardt, Executive Director for Operations, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), about
all reactor facilities PROPOSED
operated by Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
(Entergy1
having projected shortfalls in their decommissioning trust funds.
The Petitioner requested that the NRC take enforcement action. Actions Requested In the original petition, the Petitioner requested the NRC to take the following actions against all licensed Entergy
facilities having projected shortfalls in their
decommissioning trust funds, with emphasis
on Indian Point
Nuclear Generating, Units 1, 2, and 3 (Indian
Point), and Vermont Yankee
Nuclear Power Station (Vermont Yankee): Temporarily suspend the operating licenses of all Entergy
facilities having projected shortfalls in their decommissioning trust funds. Order Entergy to use profits
from its operations or loans from
lending institutions to redress the projected shortfalls. Conduct a complete review
of all documents filed by Entergy
relating to financial assurances to identify misrepresented, false, or untrue statements relating to
decommissioning funding. Suspend all NRC actions on Entergy filings, including license renewal, license transfers,
license amendments, and exemption requests, until such time as the licensee
is in compliance with
minimum decommissioning funding levels. Terminate any NRC staff
members who deliberately ignored false and untrue statements about financial assurances
provided by Entergy. Order Entergy
to publicly release all financial documents relating to decommissioning funding levels. Order Entergy
to be in full compliance with all 10 CFR rules and regulations and to meet minimum decommissioning funding levels
within 60 days or the NRC will permanently
terminate the operating licenses. By electronic transmission dated December 22, 2009, the Petitioner responded to the NRC's acknowledgement letter dated December 17, 2009 (ADAMS
Accession
Bend Station; Vermont Yankee Nuclear
Power Station; and Waterford
Steam Electric Station, Unit 3. No. ML093440463). In this response, the Petitioner
amended the original petition and requested that the NRC take the following actions: • The NRC should
make available to the Petitioner all data and information presented by
Entergy and used by the NRC staff in ascertaining and making its preliminary decision on which facilities owned and licensed
by Entergy do, or do not, have adequate
decommissioning funds as required by the regulations. This information includes any mathematical formulas, assurances, and financial instruments, such as stock investment portfolios or insurance documents. The NRC should fine Entergy $50,000
per day per each separate license until such
time as adequate funds
are deposited to make the decommissioning funds
fully whole. In addition, by electronic transmission dated December 28, 2009, the Petitioner
responded to the NRC's letter
dated December 28,
2009 (ADAMS Accession No. ML093450778), which describes how Entergy has demonstrated adequate decommissioning funding assurance for Indian
Point Unit 2. In
this response, the Petitioner
amended the original petition and requested that
the NRC take
one of the following actions: Require Entergy to withdraw any pending license renewal application currently before the NRC. Require Entergy to (1) admit that it lied or deceived the NRC by submitting false, inaccurate, or misleading data in its decommissioning trust
fund reports, (2) agree to a
fine of no less than
$5 billion, and (3) within
180 days, submit
new, accurate reports to make its decommissioning trust funds whole. In the letter dated
December 17, 2009,
the NRC informed the Petitioner that the agency was denying the Petitioner's request for immediate actions
and that the concerns about projected decommissioning funding shortfalls associated with Entergy's Vermont Yankee and River Bend Station nuclear
power plants were being referred to the Office
of Nuclear Reactor Regulation for appropriate action. "4" II.
DISCUSSION Background In 10 CFR 50.75(f)(1) and (2), the NRC requires power reactor licensees to report
decommissioning funding assurance information to the NRC at least once every 2 years.
The NRC received the "first reports
on March 31, 1999.
Required information includes the following: •
the amount of decommissioning
funds estimated to be required pursuant to 10 CFR 50.75(b) and (c); •
the amount of funds for radiological decommissioning accumulated as of the end of the most
recent calendar year preceding the
date of the report; •
a schedule, if any, of the annual
amounts remaining to be collected; •
the assumptions used
in determining rates
of escalation in decommissioning costs,
rates of earnings on decommissioning
funds, and rates of other factors used in funding projections, with
proper documentation; •
any contracts upon which the licensee is relying pursuant to 10 CFR 50.75(e)(1)(v); •
any modifications occurring to a licensee's current method of providing financial assurance since the last submitted report; and • any material changes
to trust agreements. Licensees must estimate the minimum funding amount needed for radiological
decommissioning by using
the formulas included in 10 CFR 50.75(c).
As an alternative, licensees may also
use a site-specific methodology
to determine the funding needed,
provided that the amount
is greater than the decommissioning cost estimate using the 10 CFR 50.75(c) formulas. Approximately 70 percent of licensees are
authorized, under NRC regulations,
to accumulate funds for decommissioning over the licensed periods of operation of their plants. Such owners are not required to have all of the funds needed
for decommissioning in advance.
Generally, these owners
are either traditional electric utilities whose
rates are regulated by State public utility commissions and, in some cases, the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission
(FERC), or they are generation companies that are indirectly regulated with respect
to the recovery of decommissioning
costs. All other licensees (the remaining 30 percent) must
provide financial assurance through
other methods, such as prepaid decommissioning funds or a surety
method or guarantee. Each power
reactor licensee was required
to report to the NRC the status
of its decommissioning funding as of December 31, 2008, for each reactor or share of a reactor
that it owns. Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.75(e)(2),
the NRC reserves the right
to review, as needed, the rate of accumulation of decommissioning funds
and take additional actions, as appropriate on a case-by-case
basis, in order to ensure
an adequate accumulation of decommissioning funds. Accordingly, the staff
performed an independent analysis of each of these reports to determine whether licensees are providing reasonable assurance that
sufficient funding for radiological
decommissioning of the reactor will
be available at the time of permanent termination of
operation. Addressing Shortfalls The NRC
asked licensees who showed
a shortfall to provide a written plan of action following NRC notification to indicate how
they will meet
their minimum funding
assurance level. Under 10 CFR 50.75(e)(2), the NRC reserves the right to review, as needed, the
rate of accumulation of decommissioning funds and, either
independently or in cooperation with the
licensee's State public utility commission and FERC,
as applicable, take additional actions, as appropriate, on a case-by-case basis, including modification of a licensee's
schedule for future collections. The NRC will handle
on a case-by-case basis any decommissioning funding shortfalls noted
in the reports, taking all relevant and material circumstances into consideration. Evaluation of Entergy Sites
with Projected Shortfalls in Decommissioning Funding Assurance As previously stated, the Petitioner requested enforcement actions
against all Entergy operated facilities with projected shortfalls in decommissioning funding assurance, with emphasis on Indian Point
and Vermont Yankee. Entergy submitted the status
of decommissioning funding for the year
ending December 31, 2008,
by two separate letters dated March 30, 2009 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML090920576 for the facilities in NRC Regions
I and Ill, and ADAMS Accession No. ML090920218 for the facilities in NRC Region
IV). The NRC staff's review
of the decommissioning status reports
resulted in the identification of projected shortfalls at the following Entergy
facilities: Indian Point
Nuclear Generating, Unit
2-projected shortfall of $38.6 million • Palisades Nuclear Plant-projected shortfall of $11.5 million River Bend
Station-projected shortfall of $164.2 million • Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power
Station-projected shortfall of $87.4 million Waterford Steam
Electric Station, Unit
3-projected shortfall of $45.8 million The agency
asked Entergy to provide a written plan of action
following NRC staff notification to indicate how it would
meet its minimum
funding assurance level for each of the
facilities listed above. Entergy responded to the staff's requests, and questions about decommissioning funding assurance have been resolved for each of the above
facilities. The staff's findings are summarized
below. Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 1, 2, and 3 The NRC staff documented the resolution of decommissioning funding
assurance for Indian Point
Unit No.2 (IP2)
in a letter dated December 28, 2009 (ADAMS Accession No. ML093450778): Based on the information provided by Entergy
on August 13, 2009, the NRC staff finds that IP2, as of July 31, 2009,
has a DTF [decommissioning
trust fund] balance of $326.9 million. Entergy proposes the use of safe storage
(SAFSTOR) from IP2's license termination in 2013 through 2063,
with 10 additional years through to 2073 dedicated towards
decem missioning activities. This allows the DTF to increase during
the SAFSTOR years. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's plan and determined that the licensee, as of August 13, 2009, provides reasonable assurance of adequate decommissioning funding
at the time of
permanent termination of operations with the proposed use of SAFSTOR. Accordingly, the NRC staff
concludes that no further action
is required at this time to demonstrate
adequate decommissioning funding assurance, according to NRC standards, for IP2. The NRC staff documented the results of its review
of the Indian Point Unit No. 1 (IP1)
and IP2 spent fuel management program and preliminary
decommissioning cost estimate
in a letter dated
March 17, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML100280544): The NRC staff finds
that Entergy's program
for the long-term storage of spent fuel and the preliminary cost estimate for radiological decommissioning of IP1 and IP2 are adequate and provide sufficient details associated with the funding mechanisms. The NRC
staff, therefore, concludes that the licensee's spent fuel
management program for IP1 and IP2 complies
with 10 CFR 50.54(bb) and approves the program on a preliminary basis. In addition, the NRC staff
finds that the preliminary cost estimates for radiological decommissioning of IP1 and IP2
comply with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.75(f)(3) and the NRC staff finds that the preliminary cost estimates are not unreasonable. In Entergy's letter dated March 30,
2009 (ADAMS Accession No. ML090920576),
concerning the biennial
decommissioning funding status
for the year
ending December 31, 2008, Entergy
projected that sufficient decommissioning funds would
be available for Indian Point Unit
No. 3 (IP3). Thus, the NRC staff did not pursue funding issues at IP3. It should
also be noted
that the Petitioner's electronic transmission dated December 22, 2009, requested that the NRC make available to the Petitioner all data and information presented by Entergy and used by the NRC
staff in ascertaining and making its preliminary decision on which facilities owned and licensed by Entergy do or do not have
adequate decommissioning
funds as required by the regulations.
The Petitioner made
a similar appeal
through a Freedom
of Information Act (FOIA) request dated January 1, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML100040152, tracked as FOIA 2010-0090).
The NRC response to the Petitioner's FOIA request
(ADAMS Accession No. ML100541269)
provided the data
and information called for in the Petitioner's electronic transmission dated December 22, 2009. Palisades Nuclear
Plant The NRC staff documented the resolution of decommissioning
funding assurance in a
letter dated December 16, 2009 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML093490351): Based on the information provided by Entergy on August 13, 2009, the NRC staff finds that
Palisades Nuclear Plant
as of July 31, 2009,
has a Decommissioning Trust Fund Balance
of $230.8 million. NRC staff has projected this balance to increase such that it will meet the NRC Minimum
Decommissioning Funding Formula amount, at the time of permanent cessation of operations in 2031. The NRC staff
has reviewed the licensee's plan
and determined that the licensee, as of August 13,
2009, provides reasonable assurance of adequate
decommissioning funding at the time permanent
termination of operations with the proposed use of SAFSTOR. Accordingly, the NRC staff concludes that no further action
is required at this time to demonstrate adequate decommissioning funding assurance, according to NRC standards, for Palisades Nuclear
Plant. River Bend
Station The NRC staff documented the resolution of decommissioning
funding assurance in a
letter dated August 9, 2011 (ADAMS Accession No. ML112010507): By letter
dated March 31, 2011 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML110940138), Entergy Operations, Inc. (the licensee), submitted the biennial decommissioning funding report for River
Bend Station (RBS)
for both the regulated portion
of the unit (70 percent) and the unregulated portion of the unit (30 percent). The NRC
staff has concluded that the 30 percent non-regulated portion of RBS meets the required minimum funding criteria of Title 10 of the Code
of Federal Regulations (10
CFR) 50.75(b) and (c) based
on the current funding level
of the decommissioning trust fund,
length of time remaining on the license, and expected earnings on the trust
fund balance. The NRC staff has concluded that
the 70 percent
rate-regulated portion of RBS
meets the required minimum funding
criteria of 10 CFR 50.75(b)
and (c) based on its current funding
level, length of time remaining on the license, expected earnings on the trust fund,
and future collections to the trust fund from the
Louisiana Public Service
Commission (LPSC) and the Public Utilities Commission of Texas
(PUCT). For the regulated portion of RBS (70 percent), the licensee submitted orders
from the LPSC
and PUCT approving decommissioning trust
fund collections through
2034 for RBS. The NRC has concluded that RBS is on track to have sufficient funds for
decommissioning at the time of permanent termination of operations is expected. Vermont Yankee
Nuclear Power Station The NRC
staff documented the resolution of decommissioning
funding assurance in a
letter dated February 19, 2010 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML100431486): Based on the information provided by Entergy
on January 28,
2010, the NRC staff finds
that Vermont Yankee
Nuclear Power Station as of September 30, 2009, had a Decommissioning Trust Fund Balance of $419.8 million. Entergy established a Parent
Company Guarantee in the amount of $40 million by December 31,
2009, to provide
additional financial assurance. NRC staff has determined that the Trust Fund Balance, projected to the time of permanent cessation of operations in 2012, plus
the verification of a Parent Company Guarantee will cover the projected shortfall. Waterford Steam
Electric Station, Unit 3 The NRC staff documented the resolution of decommissioning funding assurance in a letter
dated December 23, 2009 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML093420741): In its August 13, 2009, letter, Entergy states that it plans to seek rate relief
from the Louisiana Public
Service Commission, specifically seeking reinstatement of collections for the decommissioning of Waterford 3. The
NRC staff has reviewed
the licensee's plan
and determined that as of August 13, 2009, the licensee has provided reasonable assurance
of adequate decommissioning funding at the time of permanent termination of operations.
Accordingly, the NRC staff
concludes that no further
action is required
at this time to demonstrate adequate decommissioning funding
assurance, according to NRC standards, for the Waterford 3. Ill. CONCLUSION The Petitioner raised issues related to projected shortfalls in decommissioning trust funds for nuclear power
plants currently operated by Entergy. As required by regulation, all nuclear power
plant owners submitted their decommissioning funding assurance information to the NRC based
upon financial data
as of December 31, 2008.
The NRC staff performed an independent
analysis of each of these reports, identified those licensees having
projected shortfalls in their funding, and required those licensees to provide a written plan of action
to indicate how they will
meet their minimum
funding assurance level.
Based upon a case-by-case
review of each licensee's response, the staff
concludes that all Entergy facilities have provided reasonable assurance that sufficient funding for radiological decommissioning of their respective facilities will be available at the time of
permanent termination of operation. Based on the above
discussion, the Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation has denied
the Petitioner's request to suspend
the operating licenses of the Entergy
facilities having projected shortfalls in their decommissioning trust funds, as well as to deny
the Petitioner's request that the NRC
take certain actions
to ensure that
any shortfalls in the decommissioning trust funds be rectified and other actions
to ensure the integrity of the decommissioning trust funds. These
actions included suspension of all licensing actions for Entergy
facilities, ordering immediate actions by Entergy to redress the projected shortfalls, and the implementation of daily fines until such time as adequate
funds are deposited to make the decommissioning funds
fully whole. The NRC
granted the Petitioner's request that the agency
make available to the
Petitioner all data
and information presented by Entergy and used by the NRC staff in deciding
which facilities owned
and licensed by Entergy do or do not have
adequate decommissioning which facilities owned and licensed by Entergy do or do not have adequate decommissioning funds as required by the regulations. All information supplied by Entergy and used by the staff is publicly
available in ADAMS. In addition, the staff
responded to the Petitioner's FOIA request (FOIA 2010-0090) that
asked for the same information. Estimating the
minimum amount of funds needed
for decommissioning is important to prevent funding shortfalls that could adversely affect public health
and safety. No threat
to public health and safety was associated with the projected shortfalls for the Entergy
facilities because Entergy's corrective actions have adequately resolved the matter and no further
action is needed. As provided
for in 10 CFR 2.206(c), a copy of this Director's Decision will be filed with the Secretary of the Commission
for the Commission to review. The decision will constitute the final action of the Commission 25 days after the date of the decision unless the Commission, on its own motion, institutes a review of the decision
within that time. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this day of 2011. FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Eric J. Leeds,
Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation September 8, 2011 Mr. John F. McCann, Vice President Nuclear Safety, Emergency Planning and Licensing Entergy Nuclear
Operations, Inc. 440 Hamilton
Avenue White Plains,
NY 10601 Dear Mr. McCann: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) staff has reviewed Mr. Sherwood Martinelli's petition dated August 22, 2009, as amended on December 22 and 28, 2009.
The NRC staff's proposed Director's Decision under Title
10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 2.206,
"Requests for action
under this subpart," is enclosed. I request that Entergy Nuclear
Operations, Inc. (the licensee), provide comments to me on any part
of the proposed Director's Decision that the licensee
believes to be erroneous, or any
issues in the petition that the licensee believes have not been addressed. The NRC staff will review any comments provided by the licensee and consider them in preparing the final version of the Director's Decision. The licensee will have no further
opportunity to comment. Please provide
your comments within
30 days of the date of this letter. Sincerely, Ira/ Joseph G. Giitter, Director Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos.
50-271 and 50-458 Enclosure: Proposed Director's Decision cc:
Listserv DISTRIBUTION: PUBLIC
G20090487/0ED0-2009-0517 G20090722/0ED0-2009-0787 LPL1-1 r/f
RidsNrrMaiiCenter
RidsOgcMaiiCenter RidsEdoMaiiCenter RidsNrrDorl RidsNrrPMindianPoint
RidsNrrDor1Lpl1-1 RidsRgn4MaiiCenter
RidsNrrOd RidsOpaMaiiCenter RidsOeMaiiCenter MHoncharik RidsNrrPMVermontYankee RidsNrrDoriLpl4 RidsNrrLASLittle TMensah RidsOiMaiiCenter
RidsAslbpDocket RidsNrrPMREGinna RidsNrrPMRiverBend RidsRgn1MaiiCenter RidsOigMaiiCenter Package:
ML101100622 Incoming:
ML092400492 (Petition of August 22, 2009) ML093620029 (Supplement of December 22, 2009) ML093641014 (G20090722, or Supplement of December 28, 2009) Proposed Director's Decision ML101100607 Letter to Licensee ML101100601
Letter to Petitioner
ML101100558 *via email OFFICIAL RECORD
COPY |
![Description: C:\Users\NEC\Documents\ml101100601[1]DECOMMISSIONING ADEQUATEreduction7_files\image001.png](PR920h_files/image001.png)
![Description: C:\Users\NEC\Documents\ml101100601[1]DECOMMISSIONING ADEQUATEreduction7_files\image002.png](PR920h_files/image002.png){kind=small}
![Description: C:\Users\NEC\Documents\ml101100601[1]DECOMMISSIONING ADEQUATEreduction7_files\image003.png](PR920h_files/image003.png){kind=small}