ML20196C034: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) StriderTol Bot change |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) StriderTol Bot change |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter: | {{#Wiki_filter:D0CKET NUMBER nn 30 PROPOSED RULE TA (53 FA' 1645SJ g | ||
D0CKET NUMBER nn PROPOSED RULE TA | ;00 KC iE MNkC | ||
'88 JN 20 P3 :57 June 6, 1988 Samuel J. Chilk OUICE ar sism iAn-Secretary of the Commission 00CMEi t;r.gEHVMtent ion: Docketing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Service Branch 1717 H Street, N.W. | |||
Washington, D.C. | |||
Washington, D.C. | 20555 | ||
==Dear Sir:== | ==Dear Sir:== | ||
On May 9, 1988, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) published a proposed change to its emergency planning requirements for fuel loading and low-power operation of nuclear power plants. | On May 9, 1988, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) published a proposed change to its emergency planning requirements for fuel loading and low-power operation of nuclear power plants. | ||
The proposed rule change would eliminate many existing low power licensing requirements, including offsite emergency response plans, any public-notification systems (including sirens), and the training of offsite emergency response personnel. | The proposed rule change would eliminate many existing low power licensing requirements, including offsite emergency response plans, any public-notification systems (including sirens), and the training of offsite emergency response personnel. | ||
As a resident of the Seabrook nuclear plant area, I vigorously oppose the proposed amendment to existing safety requirements. | As a resident of the Seabrook nuclear plant area, I vigorously oppose the proposed amendment to existing safety requirements. | ||
The proposed rule has been developed with only the utility's interests in mind. The NRC is once again moving to place the public at risk for the sole purpose of allowing See. brook Station to obtain a low-power license, even though the question of whether it will ever be granted a full-power license is seriously in doubt. | The proposed rule has been developed with only the utility's interests in mind. | ||
In the interest of public safety, I urge the Commission to reject the proposed rule change. | The NRC is once again moving to place the public at risk for the sole purpose of allowing See. brook Station to obtain a low-power license, even though the question of whether it will ever be granted a full-power license is seriously in doubt. | ||
Sincerely, MA | In the interest of public safety, I urge the Commission to reject the proposed rule change. | ||
bL m M- | All offsite emergency response planning requirements must be in place before allowing any degree of risk to the public, including risks from low power operation. | ||
Sincerely, MA | |||
ame and Address: | ) | ||
Se | bL m M- | ||
tALd/ | - C-P 1-ame and Address: | ||
Se hAtrt-- | |||
5-M i | Y | ||
: t. > | |||
L W/ | |||
tALd/ h lYY f | |||
8806300437 080606 PDR PP 50 53FR16435 PDR 5-M i}} | |||
Latest revision as of 18:19, 10 December 2024
| ML20196C034 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 06/06/1988 |
| From: | Cyr S, Cyr W AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| To: | Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| References | |
| FRN-53FR16435, RULE-PR-50 53FR16435-00792, 53FR16435-792, NUDOCS 8806300437 | |
| Download: ML20196C034 (1) | |
Text
D0CKET NUMBER nn 30 PROPOSED RULE TA (53 FA' 1645SJ g
- 00 KC iE MNkC
'88 JN 20 P3 :57 June 6, 1988 Samuel J. Chilk OUICE ar sism iAn-Secretary of the Commission 00CMEi t;r.gEHVMtent ion: Docketing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Service Branch 1717 H Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20555
Dear Sir:
On May 9, 1988, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) published a proposed change to its emergency planning requirements for fuel loading and low-power operation of nuclear power plants.
The proposed rule change would eliminate many existing low power licensing requirements, including offsite emergency response plans, any public-notification systems (including sirens), and the training of offsite emergency response personnel.
As a resident of the Seabrook nuclear plant area, I vigorously oppose the proposed amendment to existing safety requirements.
The proposed rule has been developed with only the utility's interests in mind.
The NRC is once again moving to place the public at risk for the sole purpose of allowing See. brook Station to obtain a low-power license, even though the question of whether it will ever be granted a full-power license is seriously in doubt.
In the interest of public safety, I urge the Commission to reject the proposed rule change.
All offsite emergency response planning requirements must be in place before allowing any degree of risk to the public, including risks from low power operation.
Sincerely, MA
)
bL m M-
- C-P 1-ame and Address:
Se hAtrt--
Y
- t. >
L W/
tALd/ h lYY f