ML20002E067
| ML20002E067 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 05/14/1973 |
| From: | Anthony Giambusso US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | Ruppe P HOUSE OF REP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20002E068 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8101260258 | |
| Download: ML20002E067 (6) | |
Text
__ __
%6sh %
4 un li 1973 Docket No. 50-155 Bonorable Philip Z. Ruppe House of Representatiws Dear Mr. Ruppe.
We are pleased to reply to your request of May 1,1973, concerning Mrs. Betty H. Henne's letter to State Senator R. Davis regarding the use of plutonium at the Big Rock Point Atomic Power Plant and the dual role of the U. S. Atocic Energy Counsission as both promoter and regulator of nuclear power.
Mrs. Henne's letter questioned the danger to her cornunity represented by the use of plutonium at the Big Rock plant. As you are no doubt aware, these issues are now the subject matter of litigation in the case of West Michigan Environmental Action Council v. AEC, et al, Docket No. G 58-73, in the U. S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan. The Regulatory staff has carefully and thoroughly eval-usted the use of plutonium fuel in the Big Rock plant. For your infor-nation, we are enclosing a copy of the December 6,1972 staff memorandum which documents our conclusion that the proposed use of a plutonium recycle core does not present significant hazards considerations not described or implicit in the Big Rock Point Safety Analysis Report, as amended, and that there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered.
Because of the public interest which has been shown concerning the increased use of plutonium at the Big Rock plant represented by Amendment No. 4 (dated December 6,1972) to Facility Operating License No. DPR-6, the Commission has offered an opportunity for hearing on the==and==n t.
A copy of that notice, published in the Federal Rgi_ ster on April 10,1973 (38 F.R. 9104), is enclosed for yo ar information.
i bysent em
\\
m s.~
Honorable Philip E. Ruppe Mrs. Henne's letter also questioned the dual role of the AEC as both promoter and regulator of nuclear power. The position of the Comunissioners on this subject was recently stated in the 1972 annual report on atomic energy programa to the U. S. Congress as follows.
's Under the provisions of the Atomic Energy Act, the Conunission has a dual responsibility. To foster, through research and development, the beneficial uses of nuclear energy, and to regulate private nuclear activities -
particularly the design, construction, and operation of nuclear power plants and associated facilities. lhe developmental and the regulatory functions of the agency are carried out by separate organizational components, each of which exercises its respective responsibilities for the Consnission independently of the other.
In the 1972 annual report section that discusses reactor licensing and other regulatory activities, the t's== f saion states:
The AEC's Regulatory responsibilities are exercised under the overall supervision of the Director of Regulation.
The functional working relationships and responsibilities of the Director of Regulation are congletely independent of the General Manager who directs the AEC operational activities.
However, having the Regulatory and Developmental groups in the sane overall agency does facilitate close and con-tinuing staff contact with activities at the frontiers of technological development.
In the Connission's judgment, the skills and experience available to the AEC ataff, the national laboratories, and in the other contractor-operated facilities provide a unique resource which can be brought to bear most affectively in dealing with the complex issues of ptiblic w-
Bonorabia Philip E. Ruppe -
safety and health. To dissipate this resource hastily would clearly rot be in the public interest.
If we can be of further assistance, please let us kno.
Sincerely, dnal SI ned B.g E
A. Gia n A. Giambuss, Deputy Director for Reactor Projects Directorate of Licensing Enclosures.
1.
Memo dtd 12/6/72 2.
Notice 3.
Ltr fm Mrs. Henne dtd 4/17/73 Distribution VDoeket File AEC PDR 6
RP Reading L Reading Branch Reading AGiambusso, L:RP FDAnder-on, L:0RB #2 JJShea, L:0RT, #2 JF0' Leary, L GErtter, DRA ((/5610)
MGroff, DRA JScinto, OGC DJSkovholt, i.:0R TJCarter, L:0R DLZiemann, L:0RB #2
~
RMDiggs, L:0RB #2 s
JMHendrie, L:TR EHughes, L:RP OCR (3)
SEE ATTACHED YELIDW FOR PREVIOUS CONCURRENCES:
L:0R L:RP!
u L:0RB #2 OG
/
l i
~
O omer >
~
Y 1%U
~~
j
,,,h, sunnAmed
.Y_D,An _,,,,_, _,,,,:,sfL DJS,
,,olg,,
AGiambus so OAtr >. 5/10],73,_,
,,.5/_,h/73 5/[/73
,,5//// 73
,,,5/d/73 ben AEC-Ste (Rev.9 53) AICM 0240
- o esi-to-assen esa47s /
E
. c.
I-Docket No. 50-155 y
/
/
Honorable Philip E. Ruppe j
Bouse of Rep' entatives
Dear Mr. Ruppe:
/
Mrs. Betty M. Eenne's\\y to your request of Afay 1,1973, concerning4etter to Sta We are pleased to rdpl use of plutonium at the'\\ big Rock Point Agomic Power Plant and the dual role of the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission as both promoter and regulator of nuclear powed.
/
\\
/
Mrs. Eenne's letter questioned the danger to her cosemnity represented by the use of plutonium at the'31g Aock plant. As you are no doubt aware, these issues are now the subject matter of litigation in the case of West Michigan Environmental Action Council v. AEC, et al, Docket No. G 58-73, in the U. S.,/Digtrict Court for the Western District of Michigan. The Regulatory staff by carefully and thoroughly eval-mated the use of plutonium fuel in th Big Rock plant. For your infor-nation, b eiper, we are enclos'ing a cop of the December 6,1972 staff memorandum which documents our conclusion t the proposed use of a plutonium recycle core does not present si ificant hazards considerations not described or implicit in the Big Rock Fo t Safety Analysis Report, as==anded, and that there'is reasonable assur.pce that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered.
N Because of the public
. erest which has been shown concerning the increased use of plutonium at the Big Rock plant represented by Amendment No. 4 (dated; December 6,1972) to Facility Operating License Eo. DPR-6, the Commission has offered an opportunity for hearing on the amendment. A copy of that motice, published in the Federal Register en April 10 1973 (38 F.R. 9104), is enclosed for your information. '_1 and W dance should Mrs. Henne desire opart}cipatein proceedings.
In the' event that she does desire ho
.participat9 it
' neu6ent r
ths(she comply with the' requiremoots set forth \\tg,
T-isn ',e Begulatione, '30 CFR Fort 2, 2.n ppeticular d0 CFR\\Section.14,appy; V
of which is-encloeed.
/
^
Honorable Philip E. Euppe safety and health. To dissipate this resource hastily would clearig not be in the public interest.
If we can be'ef further assistance, please let us know.
\\
Sincerely, f
\\
\\
\\
A. Giambus'so, Deputy Director
\\
for R%ctor Projects
\\
Directarate of Licensing
\\
Enclosures:
1.
Memo dtd 12/6/72 2.
Notice s
- 4. -iO-fFR43 -7Fr 4.
Ltr fm Mrs. Henne
.\\,/.
dtd 4/17/73
/
/
Distribution Docket File
/.,
[
RP Reading L Reading
/
Branch Reading
//
AGiambusso, L:RP FDAnderson, L:0RB #2 JJShea, L:0RB #2 JF0' Leary, L GErtter, DRA (#5610h MGroff, DRA i
JScinto, OGC LJSkovholt, L:0R i.'C.Acer, L:OR EL21. mann, L:0RB #2 RMDiggs, L:0RB #2 JMHendrie, L:TR Q
f,,.I[l 0
EHughes, L:RP OCR (3)
I xne> meersf[..ol
[
OdG4 fry L:0RB #2
- TR L:0R L:RP OCR u
.h..! bin..
..D.J.Skovho.lt......AGiambus so un
..I...
ri.e.__
f suamt >
5/7/73
..../ 73 5 /.. 173..
. 51..../73
._.5/...../ 7 3 _. _5/__.173..
.63 - 18 4 1665-3 eeH7s Form AIC-310 (Rev.9-53) AECM 0240 i
-