ML20195F025
| ML20195F025 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 06/02/1988 |
| From: | Frisco D COALITION FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANT POSTPONEMENT |
| To: | Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| References | |
| FRN-53FR16435, RULE-PR-50 53FR16435-00538, 53FR16435-538, NUDOCS 8806240192 | |
| Download: ML20195F025 (1) | |
Text
_-__
5g 5~S.
(
(53 rdI65.5s)
Coalition for Nuclear Power Postponement 2612 East Robino Drive, Wilmington, DE 19808 Telephone (302) 999-7380 I'
June 2, 1988 Mr. Samuel J. Chilk, Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Attn: Docketing and Service Branch Re:
10 CFR Part 50 Emergency Planning and Preparedness Requirements for Nuclear Power Plant Fuel Loading and Initial Low-Power Operations Gentlemen, i
Little by little the NRC has whittled down rule after rule concerning Emergency preparedness around the nation's nuclear plants, and this time is no exception.
The importance of this rule's generic aspects and the time period allowed for comment are proof positive.
As in earlier statements, the Coalition feels that under no circumstance should fuel loading or low-power operation be permitted until and unless all on-site and off-site preparations are made for emergency readiness.
The NRC must be naive to think that given the financial considerations of Seabrook's operation, the Public Service Company of New Hampshire would wish to remain at low power any longer than is required.
If the necessary notification methods are not in place, intimidation of State and local officials to implement previously rejected, inadequate plans may result in a seriously deficient situation around the reactor site.
The Coalition do u not agree at all with NRC's assessment of dangers pre-sent during the operatioa stages in question.
Furthermore, in light of intense local opposition to the operation of the Seabrook Station, the Coalition feels that the contamination of the reactors by fuel loading before alternatives are adequately considered would doom the chances of them ever being converted.
The most important factor that arises from all of this is that the entire site will be forever assured of becoming a nuclear garbage dump if operation becomes financially prohibitive.
The dangerous generic precedent set by this proposed rule is a smoke screen for a concerted effort to license the Seabrook Plant against wide-spread grass-roots opposition and therefore the proposal should be thrown out in its entirety.
8806240192 800602 Resp}6ctfull'y -yours.
PDR PR
, {//,
50 53FR16435 PDR p.
v.
President Dsto