ML20236G208
| ML20236G208 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook, 05000000, Shoreham |
| Issue date: | 10/23/1987 |
| From: | Atkins C, Downey T, Markey E, Mavroules N, Mrazek R HOUSE OF REP. |
| To: | Zech L NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20236G187 | List: |
| References | |
| FRN-52FR6980, RULE-PR-50 NUDOCS 8711020458 | |
| Download: ML20236G208 (2) | |
Text
4 j
t y
'l l
Congregg of tfje lHniteb fptates 3lpouse of Representatibts i
illashington, D.C.
20515 October 23, 1987 l
The Honorable:Lando W.
Zech, Jr.
Chairman l
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission I
1717 H Street N.W.
]
Washington, D.C.
20555 1
Dear _ Chairman Zech:
-l On September 22, 1987 we wrote to you requesting that the
-l Commission. keep a public log of all written.and verbal communications regarding the Commission's draft emergency planning j
i rule.
On October 13, 1987 the commission issued'a staff paper i
(SECY-87-257) which included a draft Federal Register notice and recommended that the' Commission proceed with this rulemaking.
Yesterday'we received your setter refusing our request.
We..
note that you stated that the Commission "could hardly have structured a more open process."
Yet yesterday we learned, as a result of an apparently inadvertent comment by Commissioner Bernthal during your briefing from the staff, that the Commission has received several letters from other Members of Congress urging the Commission to change its proposed emergency planning rule so f
as-to' effectively facilitate to an even greater degree the licensing of Seabrook and Shoreham.
Moreover, when at least one staff member attempted on our behalf to obtain copies of such letters, his request was refused by the NRC staff.
Only later, when we learned that the letters had been released by the NRC to the press, were copies provided to us.
that the We emphatically do not agree with your assessment rule for public Commission's solitary action of issuing its draft comment -- an action required by administrative procedure --
If ensures that this process is fully open to public scrutiny.
senior levels of the Commission have had communications persons at with parties outside the NRC regarding this rulemaking, the public There should-has every right to know about-those communications.
be no question that the Commission's decision is based on any information other than that in the public record.
This matter becomes all the_more significant in light of the revelation that the Commission has indeed received communications advocating a rulemaking even less protective of the public than the one
-recommended by the staff.
8711020450 871027[
PDR PR 50 52FR6900.
4 l
[
The Honorable Lando W.
Zech, Jr.
j Page 2 t
October 23, 1,987 As such, we renew our original request to you of September 22, 1987, and strongly urge you to reconsider your reply.
In addition, we-ask that you provide us with a chronology of all communications (written and verbal) since october 13, 1987 on the subjects of the Commission's proposed emergency planning rule or l
the emergency planning aspects of the licensing of the Seabrook or I
Shoreham nuclear plants between (1) any Commissioner, member of any Commissioner's staff, General Counsel or any staff of the j
office of General Counsel, or the' Executive Director for operations or any staff of his Office, and (2) any employee or
)
representative of (a) any utility or nuclear / utility trade l
association, or (b) the White House, Department of Energy, OMB, l
FEMA, or other rederal agency.
For each communication, please j
the date of each i
provide the names of the participants, I
communication, a detailed summary, an indication of who initiated l
the communication and why, and any documents pertaining to such communications.
For the purpose of this request, the word
" documents" includes but is not limited to all handwritten or
- letters, typed communications, documents, drafts, memoranda, notes, and so forth; and the word " communications" refers to all and/or verbal communications including j
written (as per the above) all conversations,. meetings, and telephone calls.
j i
In light of the fact that only 10 days have elapsed since the 1
l Commission issued its draft rule, we would expect that this latter i
request would not require an extensive effort on the part of the Accordingly, because we believe that the public and commission.
the process will benefit by full disclosure of all communications prior to the commission votir.g on this issue, we ask that you provide a full response to this more limited request no later than l
Tuesday, October 27, 1987.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely, Nicholas Mavroules Edward J,Marke Member of Congress Member of Congre s Odaw
%sM Chester G. Atkins Georcfg J pochbrueckner Member of Congress Member of Congress A-I b dr hwNL -
Thomas J.
DowrTey Rdtfe r t J.' M r dj e k Member of Cong ess Member of Congress 4
l 1
- ---