ML20149E964
| ML20149E964 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/18/1994 |
| From: | Selin I, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Hirsch D, Leventhal P COMMITTEE TO BRIDGE THE GAP, NUCLEAR CONTROL INSTITUTE |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20149E968 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9408080222 | |
| Download: ML20149E964 (2) | |
Text
kDC
,a ne ns,,
UMTED STATES
+4, c,
h
,(i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
%'h l.
W ASHINGTON. D. C. 70555 e.
March 13, 1994 CHAIRMAN Mr. Paul Leventhal, President Nuclear Control Institute 1000 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
Suite 804 Washington, D.C.
20036
Dear Mr. Leventhal:
Thank you for your letter of February 17, 1994, expressing your continuing interest in the proposed rule to protect against vehicular threats at nuclear power reactors.
I want to respond to two particular issues that you raise.
First, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff is paying close attention to events in Bosnia and the former Yugoslavia.
The staff reviews and assesses a range of threat-related information daily and routinely meets with members of the intelligence community on matters relating to counter-terrorism.
Of course, vigilance and awareness are necessary to identify and recognize developments that may represent a potential threat to NRC licensees, and the NRC must be prepared to assess in a timely, effective manner any reported threat against those facilities and respond appropriately.
Second, the NRC has solicited a wide range of views and informa-tion from many sources regarding the proposed rule on vehicular threats.
Your organization presented views at an April 22, 1993 Commission meeting, a May 10, 1993 Public Meeting, and at the recent Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) meeting that you noted in your letter.
Public comments on the proposed rule are being evaluated, and staff is preparing its recommenda-tions.
We believe that it is entirely appropriate for the Committee to advise the Commission and to provide any information it feels may bear on the current rulemaking process.
- Moreover, the Commission believes that steps taken to date mark a prudent course of action.
We remain mindful of your concerns, along with those expressed by other interested parties, as rulemaking proceeds on vehicular threats to power reactor sites.
Sincerely,
_ly Ivan Selin b" u~(. g,3 t
p
s~ "t a s
s\\
UNITED STATES j.,,'
}
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION W ASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 j
- g
?~
f j
- g#
March 18, 1994 CH AIRMAN l
Mr. Daniel Hirsch, President l
Committee to Bridge the Gap 1637 Butler Road Suite 203 l
Los Angele ss, California 90025
Dear Mr. Hirsch:
l Thank yor for your letter of February 17, 1994, expressing your l
l continuing interest in the proposed rule to protect against vehicular threats at nuclear power reactors.
I want to respond l
to two particular issues that you raise.
First, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff is paying close attention to events in Bosnia and the former Yugoslavia.
The staff reviews and assesses a range of threat-related information daily and routinely meets with members of the intelligence community on matters relating to counter-terrorism.
of course, vigilance and awareness are necessary to identify and recognize developments that may represent a potential threat to NRC licensees, and the NRC must be prepared to assess in a timely, effective manner any reported threat against those facilities and respond appropriately.
Second, the NRC has solicited a wide range of views and informa-tion from many sources regarding the proposed rule on vehicular threats.
Your organization presented views at an April 22, 1993 Commission meeting, a May 10, 1993 Public Meeting, and at the recent Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) meeting that you noted in your letter.
Public comments on the proposed rule are being evaluated, and staff is preparing its recommenda-tions.
We believe that it is entirely appropriate for the Committee to advise the Commission and to provide any information it feels may bear on the current rulemaking process.
- Moreover, the Commission believes that steps taken to date mark a prudent course of action.
We remain mindful of your concerns, along with those expressed by other interested parties, as rulemaking proceeds on vehicular threats to power reactor sites.
Sincerely, y
Ivan Selin l
l