Senator Weighs Offering Legislation Ending Liability Limits for Nuclear Disasters

U.S. Bernard Sanders (I-VT) covers his face during a 2009 hearing. Sanders is considering introducing a bill that would end liability limits for the nuclear power industry in the event of a disaster.
National Journal
Douglas P. Guarino
Add to Briefcase
Douglas P. Guarino
Jan. 31, 2014, 10:11 a.m.

Sen­at­or Bern­ard Sanders (I-Vt.) is con­sid­er­ing in­tro­du­cing le­gis­la­tion this year that would over­turn the fed­er­al law in­su­lat­ing the nuc­le­ar power in­dustry from li­ab­il­ity in the event of a cata­strophe.

The ef­fect could be to put en­ergy com­pan­ies — rather than the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment — on the hook for any skyrock­et­ing costs that might fol­low any fu­ture U.S. atom­ic-en­ergy dis­aster.

Un­der the Price-An­der­son Nuc­le­ar In­dus­tries In­dem­nity Act, which Con­gress first passed in 1957 and has since re­newed sev­er­al times, the li­ab­il­ity of nuc­le­ar power plant op­er­at­ors in the event of a dis­aster is lim­ited. The in­dustry pays in­to an in­sur­ance ac­count — es­tim­ated to have a cur­rent value of $12 bil­lion — that is in­ten­ded to un­der­write such ex­pendit­ures as hotel stays, lost wages and re­place­ment of prop­erty for people af­fected by a nuc­le­ar power plant in­cid­ent.

Ab­sent an act of Con­gress pla­cing ad­di­tion­al li­ab­il­ity on the com­pan­ies, any costs that ex­ceed the value of the in­sur­ance fund would have to be covered by the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment us­ing tax­pay­er dol­lars.

In ad­di­tion, doc­u­ments re­leased un­der the Free­dom of In­form­a­tion Act in re­cent years show that the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment has not de­cided on a plan for how the ac­tu­al cleanup of the con­tam­in­ated area sur­round­ing a com­prom­ised nuc­le­ar fa­cil­ity would be paid for.

In 2009, U.S. Nuc­le­ar Reg­u­lat­ory Com­mis­sion of­fi­cials in­formed their coun­ter­parts at the Home­land Se­cur­ity De­part­ment and the En­vir­on­ment­al Pro­tec­tion Agency that the Price An­der­son money likely would not be avail­able to pay for off­s­ite cleanup. The rev­el­a­tion was made pub­lic one year later when in­tern­al EPA doc­u­ments were re­leased un­der the Free­dom of In­form­a­tion Act.

New York state of­fi­cials have since ar­gued the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment should re­solve the is­sue be­fore re­new­ing li­censes for the In­di­an Point nuc­le­ar power plant, loc­ated just north of New York City.

Dur­ing a hear­ing on Thursday, Sanders de­bated Re­pub­lic­an col­leagues on the Sen­ate En­vir­on­ment and Pub­lic Works Com­mit­tee who ar­gued that the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment plays too big a role in reg­u­lat­ing the en­ergy in­dustry and is thus stifling its growth.

The hear­ing fo­cused on NRC im­ple­ment­a­tion of steps to pre­vent a Fukushi­ma-style cata­strophe in the United States, and com­mit­tee Chair­wo­man Bar­bara Box­er (D-Cal­if.) used it as an op­por­tun­ity to chas­tise the agency for what she said was slow fol­low-through.

Sen­at­or James In­hofe (R-Okla.) sug­ges­ted dur­ing the hear­ing “that per­haps we are try­ing to reg­u­late the nuc­le­ar en­ergy in­dustry out busi­ness, just like we’re try­ing to reg­u­late the fossil fuels busi­ness out of busi­ness.”

Sanders countered that the nuc­le­ar power in­dustry would not be able to ex­ist in the United States were it not for the li­ab­il­ity lim­its in fed­er­al law and the gov­ern­ment’s ob­lig­a­tion to cov­er ex­cess costs re­lated to a cata­strophe.

He sug­ges­ted this was iron­ic, giv­en that Re­pub­lic­ans had giv­en “speech after speech” ar­guing that that it is gov­ern­ment that is pre­vent­ing in­dustry from suc­ceed­ing.

“I won­der if any of my con­ser­vat­ive friends would co-spon­sor with me le­gis­la­tion to re­peal Price An­der­son so that we can leave the nuc­le­ar power in­dustry alone and not get in­volved with gov­ern­ment,” Sanders said. “I look for­ward to work­ing with Sen­at­or [Dav­id] Vit­ter [R-La.] or Sen­at­or In­hofe on get­ting the gov­ern­ment out of the nuc­le­ar power in­dustry. Any vo­lun­teers at this point?”

After leav­ing the hear­ing early, Sanders told Glob­al Se­cur­ity News­wire he could in­tro­duce le­gis­la­tion re­peal­ing the law as early as this year.

“We may very well — we’ll look at it,” Sanders told GSN. “I think it’s im­port­ant to deal with some of the hy­po­crisy.”

What We're Following See More »
DOCUMENTS OBTAINED BY U.S. INTEL
Putin-Linked Think Tank Developed Plan to Influence U.S. Election
3 days ago
THE LATEST

A Russian government think tank run by Putin loyalists "developed a plan to swing the 2016 U.S. presidential election to Donald Trump and undermine voters’ faith in the American electoral system." Two confidential documents from the Putin-backed Institute for Strategic Studies, obtained by U.S. intelligence, provide "the framework and rationale for what U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded was an intensive effort by Russia to interfere with the Nov. 8 election."

Source:
HELPED WIN FISA APPROVAL
FBI Relied on Dossier Allegations to Monitor Page
4 days ago
THE LATEST

"The FBI last year used a dossier of allegations of Russian ties to Donald Trump's campaign as part of the justification" to monitor Carter Page, who was then a defense adviser to the Trump campaign. "The dossier has also been cited by FBI Director James Comey in some of his briefings to members of Congress in recent weeks."

Source:
AIR FORCE SCRAMBLES JETS IN RESPONSE
Russian Bombers Fly Near Alaska
5 days ago
WHY WE CARE
A MESSAGE TO RUSSIA?
Pentagon Deploying F-35s to Europe
1 weeks ago
THE LATEST

"The Air Force is set to deploy its high-tech, fifth-generation F-35A fighter jets to Europe this weekend as part of an effort to assure U.S. allies there who are worried about Russian aggression." The new, state-of-the-art fighters will train with European air units. "The Pentagon noted that the deployment had been long planned, meaning it was not a reaction to recent increasing tensions between the United States and Russia," although a statement noted the move is part of the "European Reassurance Initiative," which began three years ago when Russia annexed Crimea.

Source:
NOT ON SCHEDULE
Tillerson Meets Putin
1 weeks ago
BREAKING
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login