ML20151A693

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

ML20151A693
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	03/03/1987
From:	Lauer E AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To:	Chilk NRC
References
FRN-52FR6980, RULE-PR-50 52FR6980-00150, 52FR6980-150, NUDOCS 8807200091
Download: ML20151A693 (2)

Text

~ ~~

] b Wf h Q 5 U'" ' ~ ' '

.r]

ee -

J.3. "uclear 2eculatory Connission  ;

MAR - G G^75 i

.iachington D.C.'20555 ~

. . s.j }%

ci.. . '. .cn F2Veh 3rd.1987 i

Jear Fr. Chilk, -

I an vehenently~ocposed to 9 decrease in"t7ie size of the energency clanning zone (SFZ) of sny nuclear cower olant and I sn shocked that Sea-brook is up for a nine nile decrease in its EFZ from ten riles to one nile.

I oppose All site srecific SPZs and recuest there be no waiver for Scabrcok.

I feel that:

1)la ten mile zone is too sr.all and the mininun should be' a twenty to tuonty-five nile zone, .<ith expansion possibilities but nc zone decreases dlowed.

2.) rulom should not b3 chanced %ecause a private energy cenp nv (Sca-broo) runs into leg 21 snags. She :'?.C has nor11 and Iced obli~ations te mrk for nublic safety interests.

3.) if passed, the prorosed rule change rould set 2 recedent an!

concs around other nuclear pover pl1nta ec'ild also be iecreased.

!;. ) the probabilit" of a serious accident at n nuclear rewer plant is derendent on nany factors, hunan error included ani even if tns nuclear in-dust: / s assess-ent of low accident mbability is accepted, tho 'caf 2ty" easure of a ten nile evacuation cone is alreadv 2 tc!mn measure when ene conterplates ".nv serious nucle'.r accident. ,Chernobyl sprin'e to nind. ) ihe idea is to try to nininize the horrendous -hysica and genetic consequercas of i nuclear nishao. Any.ny, in 1985 the '7RC rated tha chance of a care melt-doun accident by t"e ve,r 9C07 at hfi.

3. ) "e,brcol ' m eroble, is re?itie d sm thic rul, ch1ncinc atte.rt is a Fract renronso te a at,t,'s re"us'l te swreve an :naccent:ble evactmtien cl'n. State 's richtn are M ntWe here. And which is more Lvertart, tb accrenic welfar? cf the nucle tr induntry or the health 'nJ. safety or the Jaeric2n ro-ulation?

8807200091 870303l /) ,3 / d '

PDR PR 50 52FR69BO PDR

- - - . - _ , _ . - _ _ . - _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ ,_.- -. =_. _ ,_. .-,. _ ._ _ __--.___ _

Therefore lot it ba known that I r. onposed to petition 50-h5 and to sit, sencific ST2s, and feel that ten =ile GZ are inadcoucte for all nuc-loir rower plants in the U.S. I offer my surrort for F.'R 5c-h5 which ..ould exmni existin~ 'JZs and the fifty mile inc:stion rathway, and ,lse increases star.c 's rights re.'ardin.? onercency nlans.

23spoetfully, nizabeth lauer 1