ML19209B092

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Ack Receipt of NRC Response to Motion to Defer Forthcoming Evidentiary Hearings on Emergency Planning & Class 9 Accidents.Clarifies Relationship of Accident Risks to long- Standing Contention on Alternative Sites
ML19209B092
Person / Time
Site: 05000471
Issue date: 08/22/1979
From: Burt L
MASSACHUSETTS, COMMONWEALTH OF
To: Beverly Smith
NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD)
References
NUDOCS 7910090157
Download: ML19209B092 (2)


Text

~

.s

~

  • THE COMMONWEALTH OF M ASSACHUSETTS tta

!h DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

',1 f, i, g.I F

e 2

JOH N W. Mc CO RP 8AC'" OTATE OFFICC BUlt.Of NG 1

j e

5 /.i ONE ASHBURTON PLACE. BOSTON C21CD (s.

CCQ,3 %-Gd

,rna cea x. a nu.am p,; ICD. & UIik FAC. fdM/

arvo=~cv=====*'

August 22, 1979

--.m

' ~ ~ ~ ~ G L?, g 7 p,,,

    • \\ WF 'tb

+ %g a

y v

Barry H.

Smith, Esquire h

f6 Office of the Executive Legal Direcror 4

ff/

6 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission N

Washington, D.C.

20555

' ', /,y y Re.

Boston Edison Comoanv et e (Pilgrim Nuclear. Generating Station, Unit 2)

Dear Barry:

The Commonwealth is in receipt of the staff's

" Response to Motion of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to Defer the Forthcoming Evidentiary Hearings en Emergen,y Planning on Class 9 Accidents."

In this response, you state that there is no Class 9 Contention in the Pilgrim Licensing proceedings.

I am writing to clarify what appears to be a misunderstanding on this issue.

Our reference to a Class 9 accident analysis prescinds from the Commonwealth's Contenrion 12 which alleges:

Neither the Applicants nor the Staff have adequately considered the alternative of locating the proposed plant at a site more suitable from a population density and environmental standpoint.

As you are well aware, this alternative site contention has fairly raised questions of population densities, and the residual risks of a =ajor accident which the Staff's considerations of population and site characteristics purport to assess.

It was in this context relating tcour alternative sites contention that we referred generally to a " Class 9 accident analysis."

791009015 7 00R_M<M iiis 302

8

,~,

If our use of this terminology was confusing, I

apologize and hope that the above explanation clarifies the direct relationship of accident risks to the Commonwealth's long-standing contention on alternative sites.

Very truly yours, bA LAURIE BURT Assistant Attorney General Environmental Protection Division One Ashburton Place, 13th Floor Boston, Massachusetts 021008 (617) 727-2265 L3 :JK cc.

Pilgrim Service List O

O e

e 1115 303