ML20059N425
| ML20059N425 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Yankee Rowe |
| Issue date: | 09/25/1990 |
| From: | Debolt R AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| References | |
| FRN-55FR29043, FRN-56FR64943, RULE-PR-2, RULE-PR-50, RULE-PR-54 55FR29043-00029, 55FR29043-29, AD04-2-023, AD4-2, AD4-2-23, NUDOCS 9010150033 | |
| Download: ML20059N425 (1) | |
Text
N,
- 0CKET NUMBER Q'y*BolB ROPOSED RULE PR A so*W m
65/20 M d#3
/
/
[
I'anta Cruz, CA 95063 g ri. p
- v0Nrr, V:
.)
y;)geptember 25, 1000
Dear Sir,
n,, :. q,... t its '
f ro psed rule en nuclear p wer plant I am writing in regards to th)t8$]Fexisting plants are safe and that license reneral. A rule that declares %
.1icenses could be extended 20 years without plant modification.
I am opposed to extending reactor licenses beyond their current 40 years. Many reactor components are aging, many plants may be permanently closd due to safety snd economic factors well before the expiration of their current licenses, t
The NRC is accountable to the public not the nuclear industry. The-majority of the public remains convinced that no more nuclear power plants snould be built. Recent polle have found i.hst 75 preen + of Americans beUeve radioactive waste is our most pressing environmental problem.
l The applicable environmenta' guidelines for nuclear power plant license renewal should have been establiched prier to the issuance of this proposed rule. The efficacy of a generic environmental impset statement is questienable y
9t best.
Each cite and reactor are unique and should be addressed in individual environmental impact statements.
The Generic Environmental ' pact statement will merely serve to limit the issues that will be addressed at the public hearing stage of the license renewal process.
Sincerely, Chb l
l l
l l
90101S0033 900925 PDR PR 2 S5FR29043 PDR f
J