ML20195E650
| ML20195E650 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Peach Bottom, Limerick, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 10/24/1988 |
| From: | Birnie P MARYLAND NUCLEAR SAFETY COALITION |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| References | |
| FRN-53FR32913, RULE-PRM-50-52 53FR32913-00005, 53FR32913-5, NUDOCS 8811100038 | |
| Download: ML20195E650 (1) | |
Text
. _ _ _
i M Wl.I,il nv-EN@@
A 88 OCT 28 P3 :02
$$0ORlDY@WAYC0
@IE heneed h # 'U a
October 24, 1988 i
l' S' c ear Regulatory Commission COCKET MR.iEIR Washington, D.C.
20555 PETIT;0t! RULE PRM SD w Attention:
Docketing & Service Branch gg y
w 7
Er: Docket No.PRM-50-62 of 10 CFR Part 50
Dear Sir:
i We support the request that the NRC reinstate financial qualifications
[
of utilities as a consideration in the operating licensing hearings for electric utilities.
4 -
This issue has direct and indirect bearing on public henith and safety.
A utility that is under financial duress, often a result of ineffective management, may take short cuts in operation and procedures which result i
in accidental releases of radiation that endanger the public.
Our experience in researching the Philadelphia Electric Company (PEco),
givec us reason to believe that large, unplanned expenser have greatly wea!.ened the utility, with no relief in sight.
This weakened fiscal condition can translate into substandard operation.
We were told that PECo has poured over 5350 million into refurbishing Peach Bottom, plus has the continuing monthly cost of 35 million each 5
i month (now 19 months, with no restart in sight) for replacement power while Peach Bottom is out of service.
Another 59 million a month cost is split among the three other partner utilities.
These three utilities
{
have sued PECo $250 million to recover these costs.
Early this year some PECo stockholders announced a lawsuit against management for its t
gross mismanagement of Peach Bottom.
l PEco estimates it will cost $80 million to repair a rndioactive fuel leak at Limerick I that was detected this pas.t August.
PEco's long history of incompetence and irresponsibility should have
[
been a factor in considering the licensing of Limerick I and II.
It is
]'
irresponsible nf tha VRC to rescind the rule which elimir.ates finanelal qu n ', i f i c a t i on s f rom ec>nwidn at ion, in linnaing.
j P!ce-e r r. i n s t e L c t tri s Tu1W l
8813100038 801024 Si"C'PC'"'
i M
hR
[+, cc.h NM '
,, $2 PDR
/
EQBOX902/COLUhBA,MD/210M i
GOD 381-2714/433-4674
.bu a