ML19305B450: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
Line 18: Line 18:
=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:.
{{#Wiki_filter:.
                                                    .
N Q          %
N
* Q          %
              %
M(,,.y.sA.
M(,,.y.sA.
J.    . ex T H E A S S E M S LY          //  oceggTso      t d .* # 9      ,-
J.    . ex T H E A S S E M S LY          //  oceggTso      t d .* # 9      ,-
S TAT E O F N EW Y O R K        2      USNRC
S TAT E O F N EW Y O R K        2      USNRC
                                                                                            -
         '.a  p.m>
         '.a  p.m>
           -"M;t -                                                    .0W  FEB 131980 > 4 ALBANY                                      C
           -"M;t -                                                    .0W  FEB 131980 > 4 ALBANY                                      C jn
                                                                        -
jn
         .sonn u. asnan s Wses'"*L S*# $
         .sonn u. asnan s Wses'"*L S*# $
         ~ ~::::::~'            cam n:w                q3G T22.~:l"3:Tll:' fFMu pa S, R- SbMR951Q                                  *      '
         ~ ~::::::~'            cam n:w                q3G T22.~:l"3:Tll:' fFMu pa S, R- SbMR951Q                                  *      '
                                                                                        "
ThC PL.AZA P. C. 302 40 0 5 M ONTAu M, N CW YORM I4954 January 23, 1980 Nuclear Regulatory Cccmission P.O. B ox B Rccky Point,.N.Y.          11778
ThC PL.AZA P. C. 302 40 0 5 M ONTAu M, N CW YORM I4954 January 23, 1980 Nuclear Regulatory Cccmission P.O. B ox B Rccky Point,.N.Y.          11778


Line 51: Line 44:
t JOHN L. BE N Member of ssembly
t JOHN L. BE N Member of ssembly
                                                                                                 ))k, JL3:pv                                                                                    f    i k
                                                                                                 ))k, JL3:pv                                                                                    f    i k
  ..
                            -
_  _
                                          -        ...
8oo.a.190fo79}}
8oo.a.190fo79}}

Latest revision as of 12:56, 1 February 2020

Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR50:commends NRC for Taking Action Re Evacuation Plan as Need for Comprehensive & Uniform Policy Is Long overdue.Ten-mile Radius Would Be Unworkable in New York City & Should Be Reconsidered
ML19305B450
Person / Time
Site: 05000516, 05000517, Shoreham  File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date: 01/23/1980
From: Behan J
NEW YORK, NY
To:
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
References
FRN-44FR75167, RULE-PR-50 NUDOCS 8003190679
Download: ML19305B450 (1)


Text

.

N Q  %

M(,,.y.sA.

J. . ex T H E A S S E M S LY // oceggTso t d .* # 9 ,-

S TAT E O F N EW Y O R K 2 USNRC

'.a p.m>

-"M;t - .0W FEB 131980 > 4 ALBANY C jn

.sonn u. asnan s Wses'"*L S*# $

~ ~::::::~' cam n:w q3G T22.~:l"3:Tll:' fFMu pa S, R- SbMR951Q * '

ThC PL.AZA P. C. 302 40 0 5 M ONTAu M, N CW YORM I4954 January 23, 1980 Nuclear Regulatory Cccmission P.O. B ox B Rccky Point,.N.Y. 11778

Dear Sirs:

I m contacting ycu conce rning a proposed regulation that would require the f ormulation of an evacuation plan within a ten mile radius of each nuclear power plant.

I cccmend you f or taking some action in this area. The need f or a comprehensive and unif orm evacuation policy is long everdue. I wculd like to ecmment en sc=e of the specifics of the proposal.

It is my belief that ten miles is simply too short a distance. For example, New York City would be excluded for any evacuation plan f or New York City, while it is very possible its residents would be affected.

Of more impo'rtance to me are the people of Long Island. It is there the ten mile radius proposal beccmes ccmpletely unworkable.

The plant under construction at Shcreham and the prcposed plant at Jamesport both are within my district. While I am opposed to the l cpening of either plant, I feel a responsible evacuation plan should '

be formulated should either plant open.

My cbjaction centers on the f act that Shoreham and Jamesport are located on an island. The ten mile proposal would ef fectively leave both the north and south f ork helpless in case of a nuclear accident.

These areas would be ef fectively cut of f in case of an accident. They would not be af forded the opportunity to move in the opposite direc- )

tion to escape radiation. Rather, these residents would be caught in a vice between radiation and the ocean.

I would theref ore respectively request that your rules be amended to include all territory east of Shorehan f er the f ormulation of an evacuation plan. l Thank you for your assistance inthismatteh ,

/ / '

/ .5 kr---

t JOHN L. BE N Member of ssembly

))k, JL3:pv f i k

8oo.a.190fo79