Text

Letter to S. Comley, We the People, in Regard to R Barkley E-Mails
	ML16067A014
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	03/03/2016
From:	Fred Bower; Reactor Projects Branch 3
To:	Comley S; We The People
	BOWER, FL
Shared Package
ML15233A395	List: ML15233A430; ML15239B062; ML16021A038; ML16021A042; ML16021A299; ML16021A327; ML16047A176; ML16067A014; ML16067A025;
References
	SST-2016-318
	Download: ML16067A014 (4)
	v • d • e

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION I 2100 RENAISSANCE BLVD., SUITE 100 KING OF PRUSSIA, PA 19406-2713 March 3, 2016 Mr. Stephen B. Comley, Sr.

Founder of We The People -

A National Whistleblower Non-Profit Organization P.O. Box 646 Rowley MA 01969

Dear Mr. Comley:

I am responding to your recent e-mail correspondence (ML16020A239)1 with Richard Barkley of my staff. In that correspondence, you were concerned that your personal address was used versus a postal box number as you requested in a prior email (ML15323A003) dated October 16, 2015, to Scott Burnell of the NRC Office of Public Affairs. In addition, you indicated that my previous letter (ML16021A299) did not respond to all of the questions you posed in emails to Scott Burnell.

As requested, we promptly removed your address from my November 2015 letter and re-entered the redacted letter into ADAMS as a public record (ML16021A299). Per agency policy, we informed several offices, including the Office of Inspector General, within the NRC of this potential information spill. Further, we also removed the address on several letters that preceded your request this past summer to use your new postal box going forward. Mr. Barkley explained that this was an oversight on his part and apologized. He further indicated to you that information regarding your address is readily available on various Internet sites that you control, and recommended that you remove that information in the near future if you remain concerned with its release.

We have restated our understanding of the questions we believe you posed to Mr. Burnell in Enclosure 1. I would note that the letter to Massachusetts Representative Bradford Hill has been publicly available in ADAMS (ML15141A187) since shortly after its issuance date. We previously provided the letter to MA Senator Tarr (ML15141A200) to you; the letter to Representative Hill is identical. However, you can obtain a copy from ADAMS by entering the ML number in the search box in the upper right corner of www.nrc.gov.

Most of your remaining questions involved emergency preparedness and security, and I believe they were adequately addressed by my November reply. With regard to your reference to a gag order, to date, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has not made the NRC aware of any outstanding governmental order restricting statements by first responders on Seabrook emergency planning. The NRC is committed to ensuring that sound emergency planning is in place at all of our licensed facilities, as well as for the surrounding communities.

1 Designation in parentheses refers to an Agency-wide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) accession number. Documents referenced in this letter are publicly-available using the accession number in ADAMS.

S. Comley As such, in the area of emergency preparedness and response, the NRC works in partnership with the FEMA to ensure that onsite and offsite emergency plans are adequate and can be effectively implemented. The regulations for onsite emergency response fall within the NRCs purview, while the offsite oversight responsibility rests with FEMA. The NRC relies on FEMA to provide a finding of continued reasonable assurance that the offsite emergency plans and preparedness are adequate to protect the public health and safety. Additionally, the NRC and FEMA work closely with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, which has the overall authority for making protective action decisions (sheltering, evacuation, etc.) for ensuring the safety of their constituents during a radiological event. The Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) maintains the FEMA-approved State Radiological Emergency Plan for implementing those decisions, and is required to demonstrate the adequacy of the State Radiological Emergency Plan biennially during a graded exercise.

We contacted representatives from both MEMA and FEMA and informed them of your concerns. Should you want additional information or have further questions regarding the Commonwealths efforts to review this issue, you should contact MEMA at (508) 280-2000.

Finally, the Chairmans office received your materials in the fall of 2015, but requested that Region I respond to your questions. It would be inappropriate for me to respond to your questions regarding the Chairmans familiarity with your prior involvement with the NRC and/or the OIG. Rather, since much of the information you provided concerned alleged past wrongdoing by current and former NRC staff, as well as your admission of the existence of tape recordings of alleged whistleblowers that were the subject of a subpoena in the early 1990s, I referred you to the NRC Office of Inspector General (OIG). The OIG is an independent and objective unit that conducts and supervises audits and conducts investigations relating to the NRC's programs and operations. As requested, we have also provided the Chairmans office with your recent letter to David Williams, Inspector General of the United States Postal Service and formerly of the NRC OIG.

I trust we have been fully responsive to your concerns.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Fred L. Bower III, Chief, Reactor Projects Branch 3 Division of Reactor Projects Enclosure

ML16067A014 Non-Sensitive Publicly Available SUNSI Review Sensitive Non-Publicly Available OFFICE RI/DRP RI/OPA RI/DRP NAME RBarkley / RSB BKlukan /BK FBower/FLB DATE 02/ 29 /16 02/29/16 03/03/16 Enclosure 1 Questions sent to Scott Burnell of the NRC Office of Public Affairs:

1) When was a copy of the NRCs May 2015 reply sent to Mass. Rep. Hill?

2) What was the NRCs involvement in the MEMA June 1, 2015, session at Rowley?

3) When will the NRC hold a meeting with first responders within 10 miles of Seabrook?

4) Has the Chairman been provided a copy of the July 4, 2014, letter and enclosures?

5) What avenues does the NRC have to take action against Seabrook if the plant cannot meet emergency preparedness requirements?

6) How familiar is Chairman Burns with the legal history between the NRC and Mr.

Comley?

7) How familiar is Chairman Burns with the Office of Inspector General reports related to Seabrook construction and operation?

8) Why is it appropriate for Seabrook to have an unmanned security location at the entrance to the site?