ML20196C669
| ML20196C669 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 06/22/1988 |
| From: | Bradshaw G AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| References | |
| FRN-53FR16435, RULE-PR-50 53FR16435-00907, 53FR16435-907, NUDOCS 8807010187 | |
| Download: ML20196C669 (1) | |
Text
9 Williams Way Durhem, NH 03824 k[
June 22, 1988 Secretary of the Commission '88 M 23 P132 OOCKET NUMBER P'
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission M COSED RUlt R.
O Washington, DC 20555 Y, hi?t N Yk / b Y33 Docke ting and Serviceshy;g,. 'h}' lj'j-0 Attention:
pc
Dear Mr. Secretary:
I am writing in favor of the proposed'"Interpretive Rule".
It is my understanding that the effect of this rule would be to obviate the need for a full scale public notification system to be in place for low power operation of a nuclear power plant.
My concern in writing is to support clarification of regulations in place to license the Seabrook Station and other nuclect plants and to prevent the needless waste of billions of dollars due to the obstructionist efforts of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
These delays serve no purpose except to deny the public the benefits of clean, safe, reliable nuclear generated electricity.
Furthermore, the delays erode the public's confidence in the federal govern-ment's ability to regulate and control energy sources.
As a resident of the Seacoast of New Hampshire with a family of four, I believe that Seabrook Station should receive a low power license and, when all emergency planning activities are concluded, receive a commercial operating license. Most of my neighbors support the operation of Seabrook, but are dismayed at the delays, cost and lack of urgency to resolve the issues.
Additional points that need stating is that the emergency planning activities currently underway for Seabrook will have a profoundly beneficial effect on the entire State and its ability to deal with any type of emergency.
This benefit has already been reali zed, but will not be sustained if Seabrook does not operate.
Furthermore, the refusal of Massachusetts to participate may put its residents at a higher risk in the highly unlikely event that a nuclear accident occurs or the more likely event of a chemical spill or fire.
I do not feel the proposed rule would compromise safety because of the existence of an emergency broadcast system, low power operation and thus low accumulation of radioactive fission products, and high margin of safety in the structures and safety systems. There is potentially a much greater risk to the public by not utilizing a vital electric generating facility.
The Seabrook Station has met and exceeded all federal regulations for safety.
It has a highly qualified staff of professionals available to operate and maintain it in a safe manner. There is no legitimate reason for further delays.
Please proceed with the Interpretive Rule and licensing of the Seabrook Station as soon as possible.
Very truly yours, h.*:&(,
..v$ 6 s a < -
George B. Bradshaw 8807010107 000622 PDR PR 50 53FR16435 PDR
.-