Nuclear funds hit with losses

Lancaster New Era
Published: Jun 17, 2009
11:01 EST
LANCASTER
By AD CRABLE, Staff Writer
The economic downturn has caused funds set aside for the safe
closure of the Three Mile Island and Peach Bottom nuclear plants
to drop dramatically in the last two years.

Since 2007, estimates of dismantling costs at the nation's 104 nuclear
plants have risen by more than $4.6 billion while the investment funds
that are supposed to pay for the closures - or decommissioning as it's
called - have dropped $4.4 billion, according to an investigation by
the Associated Press.

According to decommissioning fund statements filed by Exelon Corp.,
owners of the two plants, the balance in the closure fund for Three Mile
Island's Unit 1 dropped $69 million from 2007 to 2009.

For Peach Bottom, decommissioning funds dropped $64 million over
the last two years for Unit 2 and nearly $70 million for the Unit 3 reactor.

The fund losses are tied to investments.

Is it a cause for concern?

Yes, says Eric Epstein of the Harrisburg-based Three Mile Island Alert
monitoring group.
"It's a nuclear Ponzi scheme. The plants are grossly underfunded and
taxpayers will be on the hook for billions, if not trillions, in cleanup costs.

"The money put aside is a minimal amount (for cleanup), according to
Epstein. "The losses last year were staggering."

He said estimates the federal government uses for post-closure cleanup
is highly conservative.

The dangers listed by Epstein and echoed by anti-nuclear groups if
decommissioning is not done promptly include groundwater and
surface water contamination if there is a leak of stored nuclear fuel and
the security risk from terrorists who might release or steal the highly
radioactive stored used fuel.

"Nobody signed up to host a radioactive waste site," says Epstein.
"The promise of the atom was that it would all be cleaned up."

But a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission official said no
community will be stuck with a closed, non-decommissioned nuclear
plant.

"The decommissioning funds are in accounts that are protected.
These are long-term decisions and it is not unusual to see fluctuations
in trust funds," said Neil Sheehan.

Nuclear plant owners have to make annual contributions to the fund.

But, Sheehan said, "We do live in extraordinary economic times."

As a result, he said some plant owners soon will get letters asking
for plans on how the owners will make up the decommission fund
shortfalls they are experiencing.

He said he couldn't reveal which utilities would get letters until they
are sent.

Even if a utility would go bankrupt, the federal government likely
would come to the aid of the company "or take necessary steps to
make sure these needs are still addressed," Sheehan said.

Nineteen nuclear plants have won approval from the NRC to
mothball reactors for as long as 60 years after closing. That would
delay decommissioning but the plant still would be drained and
safely stored, Sheehan said.

Beth Archer, a spokeswoman for Exelon Nuclear, said today,
"We are fully funded for our Peach Bottom and TMI
decommissioning funds."

When Exelon purchased TMI in 1999, one of the conditions of the
sale was that it make a hefty contribution to the decommissioning
fund. Thus, there may be more in the fund than required, even with
a drastic decline in the total.

PPL customers have long been paying a surcharge on their electric
bills that helps pay the decommissioning fund for TMI's active Unit 1
reactor. That ends at the end of 2009.

Staff writer Ad Crable can be reached at [email protected] or 481-6029.