ML20155C963

From kanterella
Revision as of 21:48, 14 November 2020 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Emergency Planning & Preparedness Requirements for Nuclear Power Plant Fuel Loading & Initial Low Power Operations
ML20155C963
Person / Time
Site: Seabrook, 05000000, Shoreham
Issue date: 05/27/1988
From: Nemethy E
ECOLOGY/ALERT
To:
NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
References
FRN-53FR16435, RULE-PR-50 53FR16435-00024, 53FR16435-24, NUDOCS 8806140405
Download: ML20155C963 (1)


Text

- . .. .

autg@ ,lM'00CKET NUMBER May 27-88 m o,i n<0 POSED RUl.E I nDD g 1 ,oesnuna Re: Froposed rule - Emergency 17ais (53 FR /Wasj Planning forcamgower Operations E Nemethy, Sec'y (at Seabrook)U3NHC '

Sec'y - NRC Fed Reg -May 9-88, p 16435 ATT: DCCK3 TING & SERVICE BRAl'CH E M -f A8:57 Gentlemen - ChriNd g gI MAkc8 As of May 23, we still had not rec'd a copy of tne above pro-posed rule from NRC. However, Nuclear Information & Resources Service (NIRS) provided a copy.

A number of years ago, the AEC or NRC committed a prize boo-boo by awarding a construction license for Seabrook. ,

(It really doesn' t matter whather it was AEC or NRC - both  !

are the same old crowd, but with different initials)

Tne area around Seabrook - as has been pointed out with consider-able vehemence and repeated protests - would be impossible to evac-uage in case of a "low likelihood" major accident.

Oct 29-87, NRC approved a rule enange to allow "consideration" of granting operating licenses to both Seabrook and Shoreham. NRC added tais was no guarantee the plants would be licensed.

Come off it, please! Who're you trying to kid?

According to I4 IRS, tnis current proposed rule was presented to you Apr 20-88 by a Mr Victor Stello Jr, Exec Dir for Operations.

The name rang a bell. Isn't tnis the same gentleman who inter-vened some time back to squelch an upcoming investigation of con-ditions/ TVA's Watts Bar reactors?

Now you want to grant a low power license to Seabrook, on grounds that at low power, risks to public health and safety are "signifi-cantly lower than at full power."

But - aren' t you forgetting sometning?

At full power, any kind of evacuation plan would mean zilch.

If you railroad this proposed rule thru - and we assume you will -

we have one question:

W -t do you plan for an encore?

h m:.

v 8806140405 080527 PDR

$ 53N 16435

-_. - . . _