ML19254E943
| ML19254E943 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 09/07/1979 |
| From: | Vassallo D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Miller D AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19254E944 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7911050087 | |
| Download: ML19254E943 (2) | |
Text
- /a f e
UNITED STATES EE
[,%
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5.g'k{e 5 $
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 yngi SEP 71979 Docket Nos.:
50-443/444 i'rs. Donald G. Miller Whitehall Road South Hampton, NH 01913
Dear Mrs. Miller:
Your letter of July 5,1979 has been referred to me for reply.
You expressed concern about energency planning for areas near the Saabrook Station.
Construction Permit Nos. CPPR-135 and CPPR-136, authorized by an Initial Decision of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board dated June 29, 1976, were issued on July 7,1976. That Decision dio not require an emergency plan for the area outside the Low Population Zone (LPZ).
In its Decision of July 26,1977 (ALAB-422), the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board reduced the LPZ distance from 1.5 to 1.25 miles and upheld the Hearing Board's Decision that the applicant not be required to provide an energency plan beyond the LPZ.
In its Order of June 17, 1977, the Comissien announced its intention to initiate a rulem6 king on the issue of emergency planning outside the LPZ. On August 23, 1978, the Comission proposed a rule change to clarify its intent that considera-tion of emergency planning beyond the LPZ is a factor in the license review.
The Comission also stated that the Comission regards dealing with this matter at the operating license stage, as opposed to reopening construction permit reviews, to be a more reasonable approach, and that because the propcsed rule involves a limited element in addition to the siting and engineered safety considerations to assure protection of the public health and safety, this procedure of review of existing permits and licenses is acceptable.
Since the Three Mile Island 2 accident on March 28, 1979, and a March 30, 1979 report by the General Accounting Office, the requirements of the Commission for emergency planning are being reevaluated to determine whether changes in those requirements are required.
If changes are required, the revised regula-tions would indicate whether the requirements are applicable in full or in part to Seabrook.
By Detition dated May 2,1979, the Seacoast Anti-Pellution League (later
- ':crted by the *:ew England Coalition on *!uclear Pollution) requested that
_i Nct r f aclear sextcr hplation 15:Je an ?rder susi c.,Jinc or
. 1 C Mstruction Percit *:cs. CP R-135 and CFPR-136 pending a determination 1,u; evacuation of persons within 30 miles of the site is feasible and that site is still acceptable after analysi.s of a Class 9 accident.
This w
P00R ORIGINAL I268 337 79H 050 OO
4 Mrs. Donald G. Miller SEP 7 1979 petition is being treated pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 of the Commission's regula-tions and, accordingly, appropriate action will be taken on the petition within a reasonable time. We will send you a copy of the Director's decision when it is issued.
I believe the ongoing reevaluation of the Cominission's requirements for emergency planning and the actions to determine appropriate action on the petition of the Seacoast Anti-Pollution League will reflect consideration of your concerns.
Sincerely, YA$;'
D. B. Vassallo, Acting Director Division of Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 1268 338
,