ML20196F164

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Emergency Planning & Preparedness Requirements for Nuclear Power Plant Fuel Loading & Initial Low Power Operations
ML20196F164
Person / Time
Site: Seabrook  
Issue date: 06/23/1988
From: Aiello K
AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To:
NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
References
FRN-53FR16435, RULE-PR-50 53FR16435-01317, 53FR16435-1317, NUDOCS 8807050079
Download: ML20196F164 (1)


Text

.

PROPOSED RULE UI b

/3/7 D %ili L s a p (T3 FR lCo yss-)

g

'88 JUN 23 P7 ;

Secretary of the Comission crit c.

ATTN: Docketing and Service Branch 00cnn.m;.,,,6'n U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission BE a NI. ~

Washington, D.C.

20555

Dear Sirs:

I live in Newburyport, Massachusetts, less than 10 miles from the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant and I am writing to voice my support for your proposed rule change that would allow low power testing of Seabrook without an approved off-site public notification system.

I grew up in Connecticut near Millstone and Conn Yankee.

There have never been safety problems with a.1y of those plants.

In fact, the only times the sirens have ever been used is during testing.

New England needs more power. Already, the summer power crunch has hit us, with temperatures hovering in the 90's, our appetite for electricity grows, while putting a strain on the transmission system to keep feeding us a plentiful demand.

Seabrook is complete.

Let's cut through all of the politicking and get this viable resource on-line producing energy for all of New England. Seabrook has passed eveiy safety test.

It has earned the right to a license.

Let's get Seabrook going.

Sincerely, Kathleen M. Aiello 20 Columbus Avenue Newburyport, MA 01950 1

llOgo79880623 30 53PR1$435 PDR l

~

..