U.S. Reactor Containment Technology: a Compilation of Current Practice in Analysis, Design, Construction, Test, and Operation, Volume 1 Page: 1-28
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Nuclear safety costs are summarized in Table 1.7 along with comments
as to the possible cost reductions. It is evident from this table that,
in large-scale nuclear plants, most costs attributable to nuclear safety
are either quite low or not amenable to much of a cost reduction. The
one exception appears to be the costs of standard containment. Alternate
types of containment, such as pressure suppression or pressure relief, may
result in savings in the containment portion of the plant.
The main conclusion that can be drawn from this review of nuclear
safety economics is that in large-scale plants the cost of components
properly belonging to the category of "nuclear safety" is not large. Thus
it appears that the widespread idea that the cost of nuclear safety rep-
resents an insurmountable barrier to the achievement of economic nuclear
power is not valid.
1.2.5 Liability and Indemnity
Containment per se is not directly involved in the consideration of
insurance on nuclear installations, inasmuch as experience (either with
or without containment) is so limited and varied that the conventional
insurance practice of determining rates is not applicable. Thus a nominal
standard rate schedule exists, and the coverage is available to those
facilities which the government has licensed.
The possibility of excessively large financial liability and property
damage resulting from a nuclear accident necessitated the provision of in-
surance for companies operating nuclear installations in order to "spread
the risk." This demand by industry for third-party liability policies with
exceptionally high limits and for physical-property-damage coverage of
high-value plants led to the formation of private insurance company pools
and to government indemnification via the Price-Anderson Act.35 The evolu-
tion of nuclear insurance and indemnity practice by the AEC is the subject
of a book36 that should be consulted for more detailed information than
Insurance coverage of nuclear facilities by the government was pro-
vided in 1957 by the Price-Anderson Indemnity Act, which added Section 170
to the Atomic Energy Act. Under that amendment, licensed facilities were
required to have and maintain financial liability protection in amounts
required by the AEC up to a maximum of $60,000,000. This private insurance
protection is supplemented by governmental indemnity of $500,000,000. The
Act provides indemnity to a licensee and anyone else who may be liable for
a nuclear incident. One novel concept is the extension of the government
indemnity to include damage to the property of a person or organization
legally liable for a nuclear incident, with the exception of property lo-
cated at the site of and used in connection with the activity where the
nuclear incident occurred. Apparently, it was felt that such coverage was
desirable since property insurance is not generally available against such
Here’s what’s next.
This report can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Report.
Cottrell, William B. & Savolainen, A. W. U.S. Reactor Containment Technology: a Compilation of Current Practice in Analysis, Design, Construction, Test, and Operation, Volume 1, report, August 1965; Oak Ridge, Tennessee. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc101033/m1/56/: accessed March 21, 2019), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.