ML19332D580
| ML19332D580 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 11/15/1989 |
| From: | Erin Kennedy, Kerry J, Leahy P, Mavroules N, Metzenbaum H HOUSE OF REP., SENATE |
| To: | Carr K NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| References | |
| CON-#489-9464 OL, NUDOCS 8912040171 | |
| Download: ML19332D580 (10) | |
Text
[ f 9ffef
}
~
e, sm in xinxa.iemier mmi-se-se a:n 2nns d-m 'lesiw
- 2:
?
u. veout.;
><=Ru===
yggst,tgyyy.oo:wr m
- .a avuu m m
s= >='a O'*."%.
Congregg of tfje Enitebetates P352-
'1,,T'.E..
. m
.m..
Douse of Representathes
" ' " = -
..s 4
m.g= s, ;.. -aa Washington, BC 20515:s.:
sa m-mi
"*""O,'.'.','4 SERVED H0V i M989 -
i
- =
wee.me,.n. K.080
$0,1
+
se.1388-t
)
November 15, 1999, i
4 Tho' Honorable Kenneth M. Carr-Chairman-U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission p
Washington, D.C.
20555 t
Dear Mr. Chairman:
g L
We are extremely dismayed over the recent decision of the t
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) authorizing a full-power license for the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant.
This decision will i
not only have far-reaching. impacts on the people of Massachusetts and New Hampshire, but it calls into question the NRC's-3
-interpretation of due process and its commitment'to faithfully execute its regulatory responsibilities.
Indeed, today's decision has broad implications for all future licensing decisions nationwide.
On November 7th,_ the Atomic Safety and Llcensing Appeal Board remanded certain issues concerning emergency planning to the L
Commission for further action.
The Appeal Board told the ASLB to a
reconJider the adequacy of plans for evacuating people with ll special needs, sheltering the beachgoing population, and ensuring L
the safety of schoolchildren.
Nevertheless, within a two-day period of the Appeal Board's romand, the ASLB authorized the issuance of a full-power license for the plant, leaving these critical issues of emergency preparedness unanswered.
This hasty l:
and ill-advised action did not even provide the parties involved in.the appeals process with an opportunity to comment upon the L
concerns = identified by the Appeal Board.
In our November 3rd letter to you (copy attached), we requested clarification of an issue raised by the Appeal Board regarding the standards governing emergency planning for the New Hampshire and the Massachusetts communities within the 10-mile 1
l--
8912040171 891115 PDR ADOCK 05000443 G
).5 0 %
l
=
.. =.
=.
Y Y.
f
.)
- [.
l L
EPZ.
To date, the Commission has not offered to'us or to the
.l Appeal Board any explanation or elaboration on these. emergency preparedness standards.
One'can only assume that the ASLB believes emergency preparedness-standards to be unimportant er unrelated to the licensing process.
Nothing ceuld be further t
from the truth.
We cannot comprehend how the Commission could consider: affirming the ASLR ruling authoricing the issuance of a license to a nuclear power plant without a full resolution of all emergency; preparedness issues.
The people living near the Seabrook facility deserve the maximum protection possible.
Forging ahead with a full power-license at this time is a disservice to these residents, and it raises serious doubts concerning the NRC's ability to protect tne
]
l public in the event of a radiological emergency.
We are deeply disturbed with the ASLD's attempt to circumvent the administrative appeal mechanism that was established to i
ensure public input into the licensing process.
We believe that H
this action represents a flagrant disregard for proper procedure and for statutory intent.
Consequently, we have asked the l
. congressional committees with oversight of the Commission's-activities to initiate an immediate review of recent decisions
.I relating to the Seabrook plant.
We urge the Commission to postpone any further consideration l-of licensing the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant until all questions.
raised by the Appeal Board ha.ve been fully addressed, and until the Agency's appellate process on s.1? emergency pisnning issues has been completed.
We look forward to your prompt response.
Sincerely, j
Nicholas Mavroules House of Representa iv s Y
~
Edward M. Kinn y
John F. Kerry
[
U.S.. Senate
.S.
Senate l h_
Patrick J. Leahy Howard M. lGtfenbaum
~
U.G. Senate U.S. Senat< V e
" 7, j
SENT'!Y XE8,0XiTele:0 pier 7017:11-16-69 : 0 :10 ? ' :'
2022242417-NRC WF'15B13A ~
- s'd i
J 4
0 3
h
&: M M l
y Geste #JKKins
@eph E. Brennan House of Representatives House of Representatives-3 Don Edwards Barn ~ey Frank House.of Representatives House of Representatives
/GeorgpHochbrueckner (cp K5nnday
/
House of Representatives hafuse of Representatives Y
AulbuL l
k'&
Rol Levine Edward J. Markey
(
. House of Representatives House of Representatives f))i t d, h
of Pa ta Nanc Pelosik
,j Hode Repbesentatives Hou o
Representatives k
(
TV PRC164 et retc.or Gerry gitudda House of Re resentatives House M Representatives L WW Ron Wyden House of Representatives 6
i
- e*=
e<
= * =. *, -,..
,. [.,. _,,,. _ _,,, _,,,
- 4w
- wy..,,
c,,.-.._
.;;,~,7 " -.
T
~
D g
^-
1.1nitttFJBtattsRnatt aW wasumateN. DC 10510
.,)
J
~
)
. November:3, 1999 J
1 p.
r The Honorable Kenn,eth M. Carr -
-Chairman
.U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555 e.
t j
e Dear Itr. Chairmans.
We are writing to express several concerns regarding-NRC l
regulations on emergency respense plans for nuclear power t
plants.
As. you know, l recently the Atemic. Safety and Licensing o
Appeal-Board acknowledged to the Commission its inability to t
interpret NRC regulations (10 CFR 50.47 (a) (1) ) governing-a what " reasonable assurance of adequate protective measuresIn doing so, it means as it relates. to. emergency planning.
is obvious. to us that the Appeal Board has shown its inability to comprehend what standard governs emergency
, planning" review.
- l c
First,-
Thisc etatement troubles us for several-reasons.
it demonstrates that ten years af ter Congress clearly mandated the NRC to adept emergency planning standards, the Ccmmission has been approving plans and nuclear operating
. licenses without remotely understanding the fundamental-To that end, we standard.by which it'is to judge such plans.
strongly request an:immediate explanation from you planning is surf acing at this late date.
Second, in raising this question, the Appeal Board concluded that emergency planning has a lesser role in protecting public safety than siting and engineering design The Board characterized emergency planning as a "second tier" safety provision not tied to the requirement of teatures.
" adequate protection" (section 152 of the Atomic Energy Act We'strongly disagree of the 1990 NRC Authorization Act. ) d.
Furthermore, as you with this interpretation by the Boar over the years the Commission has repeatedly and explicitly assured us in Congress that emergenc
- know, public in the event of a nuclear mishap.
n 1993 the commissioners expressed their For example, i view on the importance of emergency planning before the gg3 763-4.
- - -.. ~.. -
,.m.
..___,.-_______.._,*_m--_______-___________----_______%_
v
~ -
u'
' uhic5Y: Xis;X eiscopier 7017:11-16-5i ;4 0;11- -
202224241'l-Mc wp.EB13A s/6' 1
c L"
2-4-
- Senate Subcemmittee' en Nuclear Reculations of the Environme Senator Simpson the Chairman of and Public.WorkstCommittee.
the CommitteeLet the' time asked the NRC the following questient-To.what extent are the NRC's current' emergency
~
planning requirements directly reisted toprotectio risk, and'.therefore deemed preemptive of Elecal L
requiremdnts on those areas?
l L
- He received the fo11 ewing response from the'NRCt
- The fundamental objective of the NRC's emergency planning -regulations is to enhance protection of public health and safety in the event of a L
This objective was L
radiological emergency.
explained by the Commission at the time of the"The proposed e
proposed amargency planning rule: rule is predicated on
. Mile Island that safe siting and design-engineere l
features alone do not optimize protection of the public health and safety...The accident showed clearly that the protection provided by siting an
/
ability to take protective measures during the course of an accident".
Additional statements issued over the years by the NRC
-have echoed similar sentiments on the. importance of emergency planning.
Mr. Chairman, given the uncertainty created by the Appeal Board's recent decision and given what we have understood up until now to be a clear Commission view, w emergency planning as a "first tier requirement of the a
Atomic Energy Act.
we are further concerned that the NRC may contemplate, or even rule (as the Atomii Safety and Licensing Board has in that emergency plans for a the Seabrook case ALAS-922 n.37),
site are adequate as long as they represent the "best ef forts" of the utility or sponsoring ' state under theIt seems frightfully circumstances'of the particular site.
clear to us that under this rule, review of emergency In fact, based on response plans would be of little,, benefit.that scenario, utilities license regardless of how serious the risk could be to the surely this is not the intent of surrounding populations.
the Commission.
e 9
U.-
,-..--e
.m
-,%-,e-.
,---...,s
,.,---.-,-=.m.--ww=-*,--w r-
. e
-w---a.-e-w
=- e 1
..L 2.,o 9 ?,,,,;,,;,,,,, ;,,.3. g 446.........
^%'
-3 L
We, recognize 'that this issue is at the core of the To that end, we Appeal seerd's. uncertainty stated above. await with great interest your In that standard governing emergency planning review.
regard, we would appreciate your' assurance that "best efforts" in no way governs that standard.
l-Lastly, there is one final issue that relates to It is smergency pisaning standards that needs clarification.
eour view that the purpose of an effective emergency plan is to enhance the safety of the publict in other words, to reduce the dose of radiation that they may be exposed to in.
the event of a nuclear accident, we are confused, however, l
.by contradicting statements made by the Commission on this 1ssue. ' In a 1997 rulemaking governing utility sponsored emergency plans the Commission stated:
1 emergency plans are evaluated for adequacy without reference to numerical dose reductions which might be
...every emergency plan is to be evaluated l
l accomplished, for adequacy on its own merits, without reference to the l
-specific dose reductions which might be accomplished under the plan or to the capabilities of any other plan.
on the other hand, the Commission has said in the o
Shoreham decision, 24 NRC 22, 30, that emergency-plans must provide " reasonable and fossible dose reductions under the circumstances."' We strongly believe that dose reductions must be taken into consideration when evaluating the effectiveness of an emergency plan.
Your clarification on this issue would be helpful.
he health, safety and welfare of citizens-surrounding T
nuclear power plants in tho' United States and of course the citizens near the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant are, as you i
Your ability to fully address and-know, our utmost concern.
)
clarify our concerns will be very helpful in our complete understanding of the Commission's view on emergencyWe look forwa planning.
our concerns.
Sincerely,
/
John F. Kerry N cholas M vrou M 4
<w:W, % 1c.
te..rd,.
,e, td..rd
. Kennedy
f i
UNITED' STATES OF AMERICA-NUCLEAR RESULATORY COMMISSION e
in the Matter of-I 1
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY 0F NEW l
Docket No.(s) 50-443/444-OL HAMPSHIRE, ET AL.
I t
(Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2) 1
-l 1
?
I CERf!FICATE OF SERVICE
!.hereby certifyfthat copies of the foregoing LTR TO CHRH CARR DTD 11/15/09
}
have been served upon the f ollowing persons by U.S. mail, first class, excipt as otherwise noted and in accordance with the' requirements of 10 CFR Sec. 2.712.
,1cinistrative Judge Administrative Judge
- 6. Paul Bollwerk, !!!, Chairman Alan S. Rosenthal Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal L
Board Board l
U.S. Nuclear-Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l
Washington, DC 20555 Washington, DC 20555 Administrative Judge-Howard A. Wilber Administrative Law Judge Atomic Safety and, Licensing Appeal Ivan W. Smith, Chairman Board Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Come,ission Washington, DC 20555 Washington, DC 20555 Adelnistrative Judge Administrative Judge Richard F. Cole Kenneth A. McCollos Ateele Safety and Licensing Board Atomic Safety and Licensing-Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Washington, DC 20555 Administrative Judge Robert R. Pierce, Esquire James H. Carpenter Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Alternate Technical Member U.S. Nuclear Rcgulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Washington, DC 20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory commission Washington, DC 20555 Edwin J. Reis, Esc.
Mitzi A. Yorng Office of the General Counsel Attorney U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 e
~
n-...
/?N**6,
-! Wy?" 7P" M
's OT9 5N.44
- 'j w
I f
'e'
'l q.
(
k 11 Os 4
.O il)G
(
t i q
-(
.)
(
',Y
'i
.. i ;
1 I
t 1
v
. l a
l:
)
i l
i 1~
0.
=
l 1, - -
s
-e
r
,-y.
TDo'c'ket No. (sl50-443/444-OL' LTR.lT0iCHRM CARR DTD 11/15/B9 Diane Curran, Esq.
Thomas G. Dignan, Jr., Esc.
Harmon. Curran & Tousley.
Ropes & Gray 2001 S* Street,.N.W., Suite 430 One International Place-Washington, DC 20009 Boston, MA- 02110 t
- Robert A. Backus, Esq.
Faul McEachern, Esc.
Backus Meyer & Solomon Shatnes & McEachern 116 Lowell Street 25 Maplewood Avenue, P.O. Box 360-
. Manchester, NH 03106 Portsmouth, NH 03801
-Gary W. Holmes, Esq.
Judith H. Hizner Holmes & Ells Silverglate, Gernter, Baker, Fine, 47 Winnacunnet Road Good and Mitzner u
Hampton, NH 03842 89 Broad Street Boston, MA 02110 Barbara-J. Saint Andre, Esq.
Jane Doherty Kopelman and Paige, P.C.
Seacoast Anti-Pollution. League 77 Franklin Street 5 Market Street Boston, MA 02110 fortsmouth, NH 03801 George W. Watson, Esq.
Ashed N.
Amirian, Esq.
Federal Emergency Management Agency 376 Main Street 500 C Street, S.W.
Haverhill, MA 01830 Washington, DC 20472 l'
i j,
Edward A. Thomas George D. Bisbee, Esq.
Federal Energency Management Agency Assistant Attorney General l
o l.
442 J.W. McCormack (POCH)
Office of the Attorney General Boston, MA 02109 25 Capitol Street Concord, NH 03301 1
Suzanne Breiseth John Traficente Esq.
Board of Selectmen Chief, Nuclear Safety Unit Town of Hampton Falls Office of the Attorney General Drinkwater Road One Ashburton Place, 19th Floor l-Hampton Falls, NH 03844 Boeten, MA 02108 l
- l
- - - - - -, ~ -.. - - - -,
we
,---..-w,.
w i
- Docket No.tsl50-443/444-OL i
.LTR TO CHRM CARR DTD 11/15/89 The Honorabl's Peter J. Brann, Esq.
Edward J. Markey, Chairman Assistant Attorney General ATTN Linda Correia Office of the Attorney General Subcommittee on Energy Conservation and State House Station, #6 Power Augusta ME 04333 House Committee on Energy and Commerce Washington, DC 20515
.. Richard A. Hampe, Esq.
J. P. Nadeau i
Hampe & McNicholas-Board of Selectmen 35 Pleasant Street 10 Central Street Concord NH 03301 Rye', NH 03870 Allen Lampert William Armstrong-
-Civil' Defense Director Civil Defense Director I
Town of Brentwood Town'of Exeter 20 Franklin Street 10 Front Street Exeter, NH 03033-Exeter, NH 03033 Sandra-Savutis, Chairman Calvin.A. Canney Board of Selectmen City Manager RFD #1' Box 1154 City Hall Kensington, NH 03827 126 Daniel Street Portsmouth, NH 03801 Anne Goodman, Chairman William S. Lord Board of Selectmen Board of Selectmen L
13-15 Newmarket Road Town Hall - Friend Street lL Durham,.NH 03024 Amesbu'ry, MA' 01913 L
l
[
R. Scott Hill-Whilton, Esquire Michael
.Santosuosso, Chairman Lagoulis, Hill-Whilton & McGuire Board of. Selectmen 79 State Street l.
South Hampton, NH 03827 Newburyport,, MA 01950 Stanley W. Knowles, Chairman Norman C. Katner Board of Selectmen Superintendent of Schools P.O. Box 710 School Administrative Unit No. 21 North Hampton, NH 03862 Alumni Drive Hampton, NH 03842 l:
l l-D
=
.-J
' 6;;
'i-
-Y 4-
~ '
- Doc ke t rNo.~ (s l 50-44 3/ 4 4 4-0L :
ELTR-TO'CHRM CARR DTD 11/15/09.
1 1
'A 1
l '.
' Sandra F. Mitchell' The Honorable LCivi'l Defense Director Borden_J. Humphrey Town of'Kensington-ATTN JJanet Cott' P-Box 10,-RR1 United-States Senate East-Kingston, NH 03827 Washington, DC~ 20510 t
Dated at Rockville, Md. this 17 day of November 1989 Offic of the-Secretary of the Commission 6
0 0
4 8
4 W
L I
e u
-- ~. - -
,._ _