ML20205B839
| ML20205B839 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 09/29/1988 |
| From: | Kerry J SENATE |
| To: | Zech L NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20205B836 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8810260327 | |
| Download: ML20205B839 (2) | |
Text
JO 4N XERRY Wa& SAC 88VUTTS Enited $tates Etnatt WASHINGTON, DC 20510 September 29, 1988 Lando W.
Zech, Jr.
Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1717 H Street, N. ',f.
Washington, D.C.
20555
Dear Mr. Zech:
I am writing once again to raise terious concerns which I have regarding the possible restart of the Pilgrim Nuclear lower Plant in Plymouth, Massachusetts.
It is my understanding that Regional Administrator William Russell is currently revlawing a recommendation to restart made by an inspection torn which toured the plant in August of this year, and his decision will be under review by the Commissioners on October 14, 1988.
Although these concerns have been raised on many occasions by local, state, and federal officials and the communities surrounding the plant, I believe that they bear repeating in light of the importance of the decision before the Commission.
The recent history of the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant is one of failure and neglect.
Served with the largest penalty ever issued by the N.R.C.,
the plant was closed in April. 1986 because of repeated failures of its emergency equipment arid f or chronic management problems.
Even after Doston Edisori embarked upon its rpgrade and management improvement program, the plant continued to experience serious safety problems as late as November, 1987, with the loss of off-site power and worker contamination.
In addition, the recent SALP report indicated at best only modest improvemet.t.
While some progress was found, the rating for Radiological Controls remained at the lowest level.
This lack of significant improvement in a critical area, despite Boston Edison's upgrade efforts, is a strong indication that this plant is not ready for restart.
There are two other major obstacles facing this plant which I feel must be addressed before restart is allowed.
First, the outstanding issue of a complete and tested emergency p!an for the area has not been resolved.
While the Commonwealth and the esto 60327 831013 PDR COMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE PD,.
1 communities continue to work toward achieving this goal, they are not close to completion, despite claims to tha contrary by the Commission.
In fact, public safety officials may still conclude that no emergency plan is possible which will provide for protection of the public health and safety.
It is unwise to roe. tart this plant until those with the greatest expertise in this area have the opportunity to reach their conclusions.
Second, the Commission has still not fully addressed the significant problems posed by the Mark I containaent vessel itself, despite a review of the liner melt-through issue presented by the Brookhaven National Laboratory to the Commission indicating serious safety questions.
Again, it is highly unwise to restart this plant before all containment safety questions have been addJessed.
For the past two and a half years, the safety of the pilgrim Nuclear power Plant has been the focus of Boston Edison, the N.R.C.,
state and local public safety agencies, community leaders and elected officials, and citizens of the area.
While some progress has been made in improving this plant, too many questions regarding public health and safety are still unanswered.
Therefore, I strongly urge that the l
Commission postpone its restart decision until they have been fully addressed.
S'in erely,
//
J hn F. kerry )
l United States Senator 1
JK/mc 1
l l
l l
l I