ML20246E289

Expresses Appreciation for Opportunity to Address ACRS Subcommittee on Facility at 890817 Meeting.Believes ACRS Failure to Provide Licensee W/Timely Notice of Subj Meeting Unfair.Related Correspondence

ML20246E289
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	08/21/1989
From:	Curran D HARMON, CURRAN, SPIELBERG & EISENBERG, LLP., NEW ENGLAND COALITION ON NUCLEAR POLLUTION
To:	Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
References
CON-#389-9076 OL, NUDOCS 8908290067
Download: ML20246E289 (2)

Text

c , .. ___

907& socan nuranta .g (ILATED CORRESPONDING pace. g prit 7f,[g, HARMON, CURRAN & TOUSLEY 2001 S STREET, N.W.

' d[

SUITE 43o TASIIINGTON, D.C. 20009-1125 89 NTo 22 P12:06 h Gall McGREEVY HARMON TElIPHONE DIANE CURRAN (202) 328-3500 DEAN R. 'IOUSLEY (gi n , 'g. TAX ANNE SPIELBERG p)CrQ'*>#- (202) 328 6918 5ANDRA K. PFAU* IFAl '

JANNE G. gal.LAGHER, of counsel gygugg gy, yggg

• Not Admitted in D C.

Dr. William Kerr, Chairman Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, Subcommittee on Seabrook U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

Dear Dr. Karr:

Thank you for allowing me to address the ACRS Subcommittee on Seabrook at the commencement of the Subcommittee's meeting on Thursday, August 17, 1989. As I stated in my remarks to the Sub-committee, the Seabrook interveners received no notice, other than publication of a paragraph in the Federal Register on August 7, 1989, that the meeting would take place. Because none of the interveners saw the notice until the day before the meeting, all except myself were unable to attend, and I did not have time to formulate a presentation to the ACRS Subcommittee about emergency planning at Seabrook.

On the other hand, it was hard to imagine that the extraordinary array of officials and experts from the NRC staff, the utility, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency who were present at the meeting had to rely on a Federal Register notice to learn about the meeting.

I must take deep exception to a remark you made in the meet-ing, to the effect that you could take no responsibility for the interveners' failure to read the Federal Register notice at an earlier date. In this case, the responsibility for our failure to obtain timely notice of the meeting lies fully with the ACRS.

In the first place, NRC regulations governing notice of ACRS meetings require the publication of a notice in the Federal Reg-ister at least fifteen days before the meeting. 10 C.F.R. S 7.11(b). The notice provided in the August 7th Federal Register gave ten days' notice.

More importantly, in spite of the fact that NRC regulations at 10 C.F.R. 5 7.11(c) also require the ACRS to provide addi-tional forms of notice such as "public releases and notice by mail," no attempt was made to contact any of the interveners, either by mail or telephone. The ACRS should also have notified the Office of the Secretary, which maintains a service list for pDR908290067 090822 g ADOCK 05000443 PDR 3so3

g IIARMON, CURRAN Bc TOUSLEY .

Dr. William Kerr August 21, 1989 Page 2 SeaDrook,.and is required to notify perseas who may be interested in.ACRS meetings. Egg 10 C.F.R. 5 7.11(d).

These notice regulations have an important purpose. As an arm of.the-Nuclear Regulatory Commission which is responsible for giving advice to the Commissioners that may eventually affect the outcome of the Seabrook licensing case, the ACRS must collect its information in a way that is fair to all of the parties. To invite the license applicant to make a lengtay presentation regarding its views of emergency planning, while failing to extend the same invitation to their opponents, is fundamentally unfair, and taints the objectivity of the ACRS' evaluation pro-Cess.

Finally, what is most disturbing about the manner in which I the August //th meeting was arranged is the Subcommittee's appar-ent lack of interest in the information and opinions that could heve'been provided by interveners at the August 17th meeting.

These interveners have spent. countless hours evaluating the emer-gency plans for Seabrook. They also have close contact with the government officials who will be asked to implement the plans, and.who are be_t informed about local conditions affecting emer-gency planning and preparedness. Finally, they represent the individuals who will be directly affected by the Commission's decision. Given the complexity and controversial nature of the issues in this caso, how could the Subcommittee have felt that its evaluation would be complete, without obtaining the views of the interveners? -

-NECNP and the other interveners appreciate the opportunity you have offered,to submit presentations regarding the Seabrook emergency plans, including comments on the transcript of the August 17th meeting, to the full ACRS. NECNP also requests an opportunity to make an oral presentation to the ACRS. We hope this will compensate for the lack of an opportunity to partici-pate in the August 17th meeting.

Sincerely, Cb d ane Curran cc: Seabrook service list Raymond Fraley 1

1 L__-_-__-_______-_-____