ML20150B768

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Emergency Planning & Preparedness Requirements for Nuclear Power Plant Fuel Loading & Initial Low Power Operations.Low Power Operation Poses No Threat to Public Safety
ML20150B768
Person / Time
Site: Seabrook  NextEra Energy icon.png
Issue date: 06/21/1988
From: Kyte J
AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To: Zech L
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
References
FRN-53FR16435, RULE-PR-50 53FR16435-01620, 53FR16435-1620, NUDOCS 8807120172
Download: ML20150B768 (1)


Text

6b bW June 21,1988

'88 AN 27,1 P 3 :10 gy The Honorable Lando W. Zech, Jr.

F Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulathg,g.,ommission f.l.

,,.,c.

g Washington, D.C. 20555 BP. A KL"

Dear Chairman Zech:

I support the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's proposed interpretive rule change to 10 CFR 50.47 (d), Emergency Planning and Preparedness Requirements for Nuclear Power Plant Fuel Loading and Initial Low Power Operations, clarifying the Commission's emergency planning requirements for commercial nuclear power plants prior to low power testing.

As a resident of the Seabrook 10-mile planning zone, I specifically support the proposed rule clarification with regard to the need for offsite emergency warning siren systems at the low power testing level. It is clear that low power testing operations pose no potential threat to public health and safety.

Moreover, I am also aware of the situation at Seabrook, where the plant owners have bent over backwards to install prompt notification systems in the Massachusetts communities within 10 miles of the plant, only to see those efforts thwarted, for purely political reasons, by anti nuclear activists, local and even state government entities.

Congress in 1980 specifically empowered the NRC to oversee the licensing and operation of commercial nuclear power plants, and I believe it is vitally important for the federal government to maintain centrol of the nuclear power plant licensing process. State and local governments mat not be allowed to thwart this process by simply walking away from the issue, as has been done in Massachusetts.

This proposed rule clarification does not lessen the safeguards that the NRC has put in place to ensure safe operation of the nation's nuclear plants, while at the same time it dces clear up an aptarent point of confusion over pre operational planning requirements. I support r.ach importaut and productive Commission initiatives.

Sincerely, J n R. Kyte 575 Washington Rd. #12 Rye, NH 03870 8807120172 800621 PDR PR 50 53FR16435 PDR hst o