ML20236S722

Lists Concerns Re Dismantling of Facility.Present Fence Will Allow Larger Restricted Area When Time Comes for Dismantling

ML20236S722
Person / Time
Site:	Saxton File:GPU Nuclear icon.png
Issue date:	11/10/1987
From:	Elder J CONCERNED CITIZENS FOR SNEC SAFETY
To:	Alexander Adams NRC
References
NUDOCS 8711300060
Download: ML20236S722 (3)

Text

-

November 10, 1987 1 Wall St. Extension Saxton, Pa.16678 (814) 635-3492 Mr. Al Adams Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 REF: Tech. Spec. Change f53 Docket #50-146

Dear Mr. Adams,

As the chairman of the Concerned Citizens for SNEC (Saxton Nuclear Experimental Corporation) Safety, I want to express some items of con-siderable concern regarding the planned dismantling of the SNEC facility.

1. There still remains significant hazard in the containment building.

The present fence will allow a larger restricted area when the time comes to dismantle it. Therefore, we believe that it is unwise to move it to its planned, reduced size.which has a portion of the containment building outside the fenced in area. Also the "not spot" that was cleaned up but continues to return is outside the proposed fence.

2. General Public Utilities Nuclear (GPUN) certified that the build-ings were clean in 1^73. However, NRC inspectors found otherwise, now in 1937 they are cleaning them up again. Since a recent Pennsylvania Public Utilities Commission decision allows for the spending of dismantling trust fund money for inspectors, we believe that there should be a full time, resident inspector on the job to insure that the site is truly clean this time.

3. Another reason for a full time NRC inspector is due to the lack cf experience and expertise in dismantling commercial power reactors. The private sector has yet to dismantle one and the NRC has not yet regulated the dismantling of one. Since this is a first in many respects, the NRC must be very careful to do everything right and not establish any dangerous procedents for future dismantling projects.

4. Since the present. dismantling plan is based on the original 1972 AEC approved plan, it should be very carefully scrutinized and modified to comply with present NRC standards. Also, the partial dismantling that was done in 1973 should be re-examined for compliance with today's stand-ards.

5. Although we are deeply concerned about the prosent plans, our greater concern lies further down the road with the dismantling of the containment building. We would like to meet with you to further express gi'3 [g h 6 U

H

2.

our concerns in greater detail the next time you visit the SliEC facility.

Thank you for your consideration in this matter.

Very truly yours,

,; , thn J h

,Aames H. Elder, Chm.

Concerned Citizens for StiEC Safety

eL 9u.

.. OJ ~

~

s  ;;' ,

e J, .y J,g v

, =

1 x'

i. 1 s' 1, 1

w'" v 1, r ,

J 1, P ', [' y'M 1,

J 1,

%= \

1, _

1, 1,

1 1

1, 1,

94 1 n

i i

o s

s n

n5 o5 _

C5 0

y2 r

o .

taC.

lD su ng ,

aen dR o A t rg l an Aei

.lh rua cs MEW 8

7 6

r 6 e 1 dt l x .

EEa I

t ,

.P I

s S no elt ml x aa a JWS

)}

ll