and probable lack of NRC licensing. 4. 5. The section 170n "waiver of defenses" provision of the Act would apply in the event of an extraordinary nuclear occurrence (ENO) in the course of transporting waste to the WIPP site because the waste would be "special nuclear material" or "by-product material." The Act or the implementing indemnity article does not require the state to use its own be subject to costs of investigation or settlement of claims before claimants would be paid. 7. DOE would bear the costs of cleanup and contamination regardless of provable release of radioactive contaminants into the biosphere and regardless of the potential liability or fault of others. 8. DOE would make all possible efforts to provide $60M additional insurance on a daily basis when high level waste is being shipped in the state. 9. DOE would assist the state in presenting its The foregoing guarantees resulted from an opinion of DOE's Office of General Counsel asserting that its interpretation of the Price-Anderson Act was consistent with congressional intent and also the implementation of those guarantees. In the event of nuclear accident giving rise to liability, the state would rely on the SSA and DOE's position as expressed in the opinion. Nevertheless, with regard to those provisions and the suggestions which follow, the state believes that to remove any doubt as to Price-Anderson applicability to WIPP and to increase public protection, Congress should strongly consider extending and amending the Act consistent with the issues raised in this testimony. Specifically, the state urges the Congress to consider amending the Act to clearly provide the following: 1. Substantially increasing the $500M limit of reflect current estimates of potential liability and damage in the event of nuclear accident. 2. Equalizing coverage for WIPP and NRC licensed activities. 3. Extending the twenty-year statute of limitations and making the "waiver of defenses" provisions applicable to nuclear accidents not categorized as extraordinary nuclear Occurrences and to the federal government's own liability pursuant claims brought under the Tort Claims Act for nuclear accidents. to 4. Making the "waiver of defenses" provision applicable in the event of a nuclear accident at the WIPP site, even though WIPP is unlicensed and is not a "production or utilization facility." even 5. Providing coverage for evacuation costs though the threat and release of radiation does not occur and the event in question may not, as now defined, qualify as a "nuclear incident." 7. Explicit provisions which spell out the appli- or any claim of ambiguity in the SSA. Both the SSA and its companion agreement, the Stipulated Agreement, have as their underpinnings the requirement that the parties proceed in "good faith" to effectuate their provisions. The state would prefer to work with DOE and the Congress to insure that its concerns as expressed here are fully considered and passed into law. Many of you are aware that the WIPP has not enjoyed unanimous support from the citizens of New Mexico or its leaders in the past. Controversy has been abundant over the real or suspected mission of the project, the manner in which DOE has proceeded, the benefits or detriments to the state and the potential danger which construction and operation of the project may mean. Extending and amending Price-Anderson to reflect and cover New Mexico's concerns would be welcome and sound. Thank you for allowing me to speak before this committee. I shall be glad to answer any questions. |