ML20215L020
| ML20215L020 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 05/07/1987 |
| From: | Erin Kennedy, Kerry J, Markey E HOUSE OF REP. |
| To: | Zech L NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| References | |
| CON-#287-3395 OL-1, NUDOCS 8705120073 | |
| Download: ML20215L020 (3) | |
Text
m:~ L50- us/qvy'JH ? /, lgyr ~
o
.. 3315
. +. s. w.n Congregg of tijc 4.Initeb OtateJL _-
house of Representatibeg "T.I
^
alasbingion, D.C. 20515 19 MY -8 P4 :31 May 7, 1987 0Fr u.
__u
- s. n ';
s.,
09CrI nn :, y anpe Honorable Lando W.
Zech, Jr.
Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
((pjED MAY 111987 1717 H Str eet, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20555
Dear Mr. Chairman:
On April 9,1987, the Commission issued its decision on the The Commission stay of issuance of a Appeals Board case ALAB-853.
license for the Seabrook nuclear power plant remains in effect In pending consideration of PSNH's request for vacation of stay.for the reasons stated anticipation of the Commission's ruling, below we ask the Commission to continue its stay of the staff i
issuance of any license until the off-site emergency planning issues are resolved.
Although we recognize that the Commission's regulations permit issuance of a low-power license prior to resolution of outstanding issues relating to of f-site emergency planning, special circumstances exist in the Seabrook case which make Here, as in only application of this regulation inappropriate.affected state and local governmen j
one other case, taken the position that no adequate of f-site emergency planning is Specifically, the Governor of possible for their jurisdictions.the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and Massachusetts and New Hampshire have declined to participate in emergency planning at Seabrook as a consequence of their conviction that no conceivable emergency planning can provide reasonable assurances that the health and safety of their citizens will be adequately protected in the event of a serious reactor Among the special circumstances contributing to these accident.
decisions are the proximity to nearby beaches which are visited routinely by tens of thousands of visitors during the summer, a limited number of access roads, and an absence of buildings suitable for sheltering in the event of a significant release of radioactivity f rom Seabrook.
Thus, unlike the typical licensing situation contemplated by the regulations, there exists real doubt.as to whether the off-site emergency planning issue at Seabrook will ever be resolved af firmatively.
If it is determined that adequate planning is indeed not possible, a full-power license cannot be issued.
8705120073 870507 PDR ADOCK 05000443 O
PDR 4p'U
\\
_ _ _. - =
=....-.
The Honorable Land) W.
Zech, Jr.
Paga 2-May 7, 1987 In light of that uncertainty, there is simply no need to Everyone commence low-power testing in the near f uture.
associated with the Seabrook controversy acknowledges the inevitability of protracted litigation of the off-site emergency planning issues -- litigation that will take months, if not years.
In view of Low-power testing normally takes only several months.
these certain lengthy delays, early commencement of low-power Mor eover, ev en testing serves absolutely no usef ul purpose.
low-power operation of the Seabrook plant will irradiate components in and near the reactor core and will produce dangerous Permitting levels of radioactivity in the reactor's fuel.
low-power testing would result in the needless contamination of a plant that may never run at full-power, and would create hazardous nuclear wastes.
There is another and perhaps even more compelling reason for the Commission to stay the issuance of a low-power license at this For the Commission to function eff ectively, it must enjoy i
time.
the confidence of the public that it conducts licensingThe residents of the j
proceedings in a f air and impartial f ashion. communities in th whether the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has prejudged the This outstanding issues pertaining to full-power licensing.
concern has been intensified by the Commission's recently-proposed rule change regarding emergency planning requirements, and by the assistance provided by the NRC staf f to the utility in craf ting technical justification for the utility's petition, now pending before the ASLB, to reduce the emergency planning zone to one l
mile.
To restore some measure of public confidence in the NRC among the people of Massachusetts and New Hampshire, the NRC must send a clear signal that it is not rushing headlong to full-power Issuing a low-power license while the off-site l
emergency planning issues are so f ar f rom resolution would s licensing.
precisely the wrong signal.
i message that is urgently needed.
Therefore, we strongly urge the Commission to stay any action on the issuance of a low-power test license for Seabrook until all issues pertaining to emergency planning have been completely i
Any -other action by the Commission will only increase public cynicism regarding the licensing process and will compel resolved.
the Congress to consider additional legislation to assure the States that their concerns and views will be sufficiently i
l considered in the licensing process.
i Sincerely,
(
i EDWARD M. KENNEDY
[HNKERRY
[
m-we<m-v---,--e--,--
m
,---ene,---..w,v-----,m-.
m.--.-
,-n--w.-.,,m-am,-.we-,--,--,e,_m.,.,wa_w-,_
e -e mmw-r--w~e v-a---ae------e
The Honorable Londo W.
Zech, Jr.
Page 3 May 7, 1987 Aq ncf
~~
sIgcsSgvecoteS eoq,.x.x - f MS LAee A/u u
.. n S
$h kWKRDPhBOLAND SILVIO O. CONT.
N ktuuA_
CHESTER G. ATKINS JOSEPH P. KENNEDY II kk=$
l BARNE[ FRANK
/
l l
l
...