ML20150E889

Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Licensing of Nuclear Power Plants Where State &/Or Local Govts Decline to to Cooperate in Offsite Emergency Planning

ML20150E889
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	02/07/1987
From:	Kuhn H AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To:	NRC COMMISSION (OCM), NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
References
FRN-52FR6980, RULE-PR-50 52FR6980-00003, 52FR6980-3, OL, NUDOCS 8807180035
Download: ML20150E889 (1)

Text

- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ .

0CKILT NW  ;,

p$ FC.[h- ~

I 'd /--

290 POSED RUlf. _

/FEB 2 3 887){gg pg gfh t,,

3 j '87 FEB 19 P5 :55 4

15 Elm Street  !

Pepperell cr; , l Massachusetts 01463 00u  ;

February 7, 1987 P'E l

. Chairman United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nashington, D.C. 20555 9

Dear Mr. Chairman:

The press n ports that the NRC might sidestep Massachusetts 8 objection to evacuation plans for the Seabrook plant.

If you change your rule, the new rule should be that evacuation ph miLiitvapproved before plant constructir>n begins.

Soms people have largs investments in nuclear plants, but that fact does not mean necessarily that further investment in production As wise a', the current level of technology. I have chosen not to invest in nuclear power, and you should not force me to invest either my money or, potentially, my health or life sin: ply because those who have invested are eager for a return on their investment.

I can sympathise with people Wto may see the evacuation plan issue as being a procedural technicality that should be removed surgically. I believe, however, that it is not essentially a procedural matter; it is a substant.ive issue. The possible

. consequencea of a major accident must be awardried carefully.

Tou must be willing to consider the possibility that the new Seabrook far:Llity should never open because current knowledge tells us it would be too risky.

Tee, t' tere are larce investments involved, but those are eunk costs. The decision to go forward met rest entirely on future cors versus benefit, and the most important consideration is the sdsty of the community.

} There are huge risks with unknown probabilities here, and

( where the risk is large, it is prudent to assume the probability j to be on the high side. Seabrook investors might like to assume the probability of a major accident to be very small, That 3ssumtion certainly is understandable, but it is not prudent.

Sincerely, nyT A Henry Kuhn 8807100035 070E07 PDR PR SO 52FR6900 PDR e

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _