ML20207B176

Responds to Re Evacuation Planning at Facility. State Governors Cannot Overrule NRC Decisions.Action on Any Requests for Exemption Controlled by Procedural Steps & Criteria Specified in 10CFR2.758 & 50.12

ML20207B176
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	11/05/1986
From:	Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Holway F AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
References
NUDOCS 8611110522
Download: ML20207B176 (7)

Text

o

' ^

0 t- Y Mrs. Frances I. Holway NOV 0 51986 3 647 Washington Road 40 M [

Rye, New Hampshire 03870

Dear Mrs. Holway:

Thank you for your letter dated September 16, 1986, regarding evacuation planning at Seabrook. You listed several questions to which I am respondirg.

First, you asked about the extent to which the governors of Massachusetts and New Hampshire can overrule NRC decisions. A governor cannot overrule a decision made by the NRC. The NRC has the sole authority to determine compliance with its regulations and, hence, whether a plant may be licensed. The question of whether an acceptable emergency plan can be implemented in the absence of plans provided by state and/or local governments is dependent upon the specific set of f facts that relate to a particular plant and emergency plan.

Second, you asked about the extent to which the NRC will obey the present regulations about needing satisfactory evacuation plans before allowing the Seabrook Station to operate. Applicants for an operating license permitting operation at above 5% of rated power are required to comply with the Commission's emergency planning regulations (set out in 10 CFR 50.47 and Appendix E to Part 50) unless an exemption from those regulations is requested by the applicant and granted by the NRC. Action on any exemption request would be controlled by procedural steps and criteria specified in the Commission's regulations (10 CFR 2.758 or 10 CFR 50.12).

Third, you stated that evacuation is absolutely impossible in the town of Rye and several other towns within the 10 mile radius. The Commission believes evacuation is an effective protective measure. However, evacuation should be viewed in context with the Commission's overall approach to safety. The Commission relies upon a defense-in-depth strategy to prevent accidents from happening and to mitigate their consequences. NRC regulations require conservatism in design, construction, testing, operating and maintenance of nuclear power plants. Emergency response capabilities are mandated to provide additional defense-in-depth protection to the surrounding population. It should also be noted that evacuation is only one of several protective measures which could be employed in the event of an emergency (others are shelter, and shelter followed by relocation).

8611110522 861105 PDR ADOCK 05000443 H PDR

Mrs. Francis I. Holway Finally, you referred to research in safe nuclear power which you understood may be completed in 15 years or so. The Department of Energy among other federal agencies is undertaking research activities intended to lead to power reactor designs which incorporate features which could be regarded as

" inherently safe." These features could lead to designs which reduce the likelihood of certain kinds of accidents or reduce the potential consequences of certain accidents. It is not currently know the extent to which this action will be successful and, if so, in what time frame.

Sincerely, IN N $4~Lu Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Distribution Docket Nos.: 50-443 & 50-444 ED0-2163 M8ridgers T. Novak AJohnson (2)

E. Rossi TRehm V. Noonan V. Nerses w/ incoming M. Rushbrook E. Doolittle w/ incoming PPAS NRC PDR (w/ incoming)

LPOR (w/ incoming)

J. Taylor, I&E G. Cunningham, OGC in Bethesda T. Murley, Region I Beckjord EP:IE OGC H. Denton/R. Vollmer DMatthews D. Mossburg ED0-2163 10/31/86 (by phone) 10/29/86

/

See previous concurrence hii PD#5 PD#5 PAD #5:D AD:NRR DI -

EDoolittle:ss VNerses VNoonan TNovak N.RVo r He 11/03/86 10/29/86 10/29/86 10/30/86 11/e[/86 11/y/86 I

i I

l 1

l I

m . . -

Mrs. Francis I. Holway Finally, you referred to research in safe nuclear power which you understood may be completed in 15 years or so. The Depart nt of Energy aniong other federal agencies is undertaking research activi ies intended to lead to power reactor designs which incorporate features whi h could be regarded as

" inherently safe." These features could lead to designs which reduce the lik11 hood of certain kinds of accidents or r duce the potential consequences of certain accidents. It is not currently now the extent to which this action will be successful and, if so, in w at time frame, incerely.

Parold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Distribution Docket Nos.: 50-443 & 50-4 h "g ED Q l(o( hb3pA V. Noonan V. Nerses w/ incoming M. Rushbrook E. Doolittle w/incom g PPAS NRC PDR (w/incomin I.PDR (w/ incoming)

J. Taylor, I&E 4 G. Cunningham, GC in Bethesda l T. Murley, Re on I Beck.jord EP: IE i F. Denton/R Vollmer DMatthews j

D. Mossbur _ yhu -mb% 10/ /86 See prev ous concurrence P PD#5 OGC DIR:DIV AD:NRR DIR:NRR

! E le:ss VNerses VNoonan TNovak HDenton 19/ /86 10/ /86 10/ /86 10/ /86 10/ /86 10/ /86 i

i l

, - - ,. _. - . -- - . -,,..,---..- ,,. c -. - - . , - . - - - , - - , - . . - - --

1

-2 Finally, you referred to research in safe nuclear power whi,c ou understood may be completed in 15 years or so. The Department of En rgy amoung other federal agencies is undertaking research activities in ed to lead to power reactor designs which incorporate features which coul e regarded as

" inherently safe." These features could lead to de ns which reduce the liklihood of certain kinds of accidents or reduce e potential consequences of certain accidents. It is not certain that th research will result in construction of new reactors in 15 years or bey nd, and it is not likely that delay of presently proposed facilities is a p dent course of action in expectation of new and better power. reactor in the future.

Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulations N

Distribution 4 Docket Nos.: 50-443 & 50- 4 lh 'd vyje sJ T. Novak E. Rossi N  %,

V .' ers M. Rushbrook w/ incoming! W s E. Doolittle w/ incoming PPAS NRC PDR (w/ incoming)

LPDR (w/ incoming)

J. Taylor, I&E /

G. Cunningham, OGC in Bethesda $

T. Murley, Region I Beck.jord kb (

\

d1 (

/

H. Denton/R. Vollmer -

-/

D. Mossburg

/h /[<8 I P P OG DIR:DIV )

, DIR:NRR EM tie:ss es -

4 4.. VNoonan ey T o ak HDenton 10$86 1/M/86 10 j/86 10/o/8 f 10/ /86 10/ /86

\ EP 'IE O Amt)heu)5

\o) I 8(a

=

[JQnneef . '. ~

'I

" ~ /* #'o UNITED STATES

. ! *i - "i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

. WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 y -- + - 5 ;g ~=2'

• • • • • g hgQ- tl

. EDO PRINCIPAL CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL

.FROM: DUE: 10/17/86 EDO CONTROL: 002163 DOC DT: 09/16/86 MRS. FRANCES I. HOLWAY, RYE, N.H.

• C/3f[d'c . FINAL REPLY:

TO:

CHAIRMAN ZECH FOR SIGNATURE OF: ** GREEN ** SECY NO: 8 DENTON h . c.

$ i: DESC: ROUTING:

p, REQUEST FACTS ON POWER OF NRC L HOW IT WOULD USE TAYLOR THAT POWER IN SEABROOK DISPUTE GCUNNINGHAM MURLEY DATE: 09/29/86 BECKJORD ASSIGNED TO: NRR CONTACT: DENTON

_ _ _ n.z 1. m.

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS:

NRR RECElVED: SEPT. 30, 1986 ACTION: (DPLAINOVAKL"?

NRR ROUTING: DENTON/VOLLMER L PPAS MOSSBURG VXA: 6.L M E$ '

ttpij8G -

o.t cc'Lcc_1 m C/3%

i

, 1

, *Y ,. .. .

647 Washington Rd.,

. . c-Ilye , 11.11. 03870 September 16, 1986 Mr. Landow Zech, Chairman, Nuclear Regulatory Commission' Washington, D.C. 20555

Dear Mr. Zech:

Yesterday while I was making a hurried visit to Washington I tried to see you but, as things turned out, ended with only a telephone con-versation with Poa:Rehm who suggested I write this letter to you.

' I was seeking facts on the power of the luiC and how it would use that power in the Seabrook dispute.

To what extent can Governor Dukakis of Massachusetts and 'probably-to-be-elected Governor McCacherr. Of :cw Hampshire overrule your decisions?

To what extent win the NilC Obey the present regulations about needing satisfactory evacuation plans before allowing Seabrook Station to operate?

Satisfactory evacuation is absolutely impossible in my town of flye and sev-eral other towns in the 10 mile radius. Though we have been " dismissed" our lives are still just as much in danger.

Please read the attached copy of a Ictter on the subject. You seem,to be way out of line with the International Committec 3 aadiation Protection.

Please gi,ve human life andsafety a higher priority than investments in pub-lic utilities. 7 I understand that research in safe nuclear /may be completed in 15 years or so. CouJd it be that if you refuse to allow unsafe nuclear power this effort will be speeded up and be completed in a much shorter time?We really do have enough power sources in New I!ampshire to wait for it.

Sincerely, Q Nnm .> a & -O:cNus.

(Hrs.) Frances I. !!olway -

May God (and you) have mercy on the human race.

cu Q z%cs- g 4dk do '6W

• \

3 J m wl.

7 -t (Y EDO - 002163

~ ~ ~ -

h

.-f

- 'i

'*?

.,,, ,1 ..

Foster's Dail Democrat gH'geg0 ,

U*I .

\

gx (l. )' ,and increase ioactivity yourthey as and how dosages wish, of ra- Dover, IJ.H.

sept. 12, 1986 l

the NRC n\yv\ Write and tel; the NRC you oppose these changes. Write the Nuciear Regulatory Commission, Docketing To the editor: & Service Branch, Washington, D.C.

The Nuclear Regulatory Agency 20555. Send copies to your congress-was established as a reform agency men. Comments due Sept.12.

after the old AEC was discredited' Also write your congressman and and dissolved h 19H. It was given ask them to curb the powers of the t authority to regulate the commercial NRC. With one letter you can shoot f aspects of the atom. Its mandate: to down two birds: the NRC, and the

oversee the safety and licensing of nuclear plant owners who want to I'

auclear power plants. Its practice: to continue to tyrannize you, your pock-speed the licensing and overlook the elbooks, your lives, your progeny.

safety. -

! In continuauou of this policy,it has Frite nowl Ingrid M.Sanborn

'. proposed some rule changes to go Chairman Education Committee into effect immediately, after public Citizens Within The comment. .1 Tpa Mlle Radius te ebenge would drastically re- p,. 6 ausa duce public participation in licensing hearings. Another would drastic &uy increase up to ten times the present ,

limits set for radiation exposure to workers laside the plants, the public outalde and the environment all around. In contrast, the Internation-at Commission on Radiation Prctec-i tiontimes five has recommended lower than presentlevel NRClimits levels.

/

!! these rule changes are allowed, the NRC could neatly kill off one bird (you the public) with two stones:

c shut you out of the licensing process, .

w ..~ m -- ._ ~- ,

/

I

i i

s l

i

.I, s

• iolvay yp VIN ,

ilI V T-I C 'I weru2w --

Rye, U.H. A ,pg ,;$ -  %

x a e <-.--.

$ 0 tEP # " ".

, r - .

1,

/986 - ,

- m J

1 i

! 3 usr22 ar. Tom Rehm 1

1 Room 6709 Nuclear Regulatry Commission ,

l Maryland National Bank Building 1

Pethesda,1iaryland(2c5 I w T h 1

Served by Washington, D.C. AC SS i

i  !, '

i \

i - , , . _ _ _ _

1 1

1 i

l 1

1 4

e i

i 5