ML20211Q445

Expresses Concerns Re Efforts of Applicants for Nuclear Power Plant Licenses to Circumvent Current Requirements for Emergency Evacuation Planning.Nrc Should Demonstrate Total Commitment to Health & Safety by Upholding Regulations

ML20211Q445
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	12/22/1986
From:	Hart G SENATE, ENVIRONMENT & PUBLIC WORKS
To:	Zech L NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML20209D110	List: ML20209D104 ML20211D940 ML20211Q366 ML20211Q445 ML20211Q519 ML20211Q589 ML20211Q652 ML20212A127 ML20212A548 ML20212A651 ML20212A719 ML20212A830 ML20212A898 ML20212B029 ML20212B653 ML20212B746 ML20212B797 ML20212B849 ML20212B910 ML20212B949 ML20212B979 ML20212C033 ML20212C346 ML20212C415 ML20212C466 ML20212C484 ML20212C497 ML20212C511 ML20212C534 ML20212C558 ML20212C593 ML20212C611 ML20212C625 ML20212C654 ML20212C665 ML20212C672 ML20212C697 ML20212C710 ML20212C717 ML20212C764 ML20212C770 ML20212C780 ML20212C787 ML20212C794 ML20212D396 ML20212E982 ML20213A347 PNO-III-85-030, on 850401,during Visual Exam Prior to Ultrasonic testing,through-the-wall crack-like Indication Noted in Area Between Main Recirculation Pump & Base of Jet Pump Riser (M).Corrective Action Will Be Monitored
References
NUDOCS 8703030093
Download: ML20211Q445 (2)

Text

,

D GWHW cm="m y cau m eo Ameo senwices swinomorrum pueue woes

~

111titti $tates $titatt WASHINGTON, DC 20610 December 22, 1986 Admiral Lando Zech Chairman Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1717 H Street N.W. >

Washington DC

Dear Mr. Chairman:

In my final months in the Senate, I have been increasingly disturbed by the efforts of certain applicants for nuclear power plant licenses to circumvent current requirements for emergency evacuation planning. Thus, yesterday's announcement that the applicants in the Seabrook case would seek a reduction in the planning zone was not a surprise.

But I was stunned at the proposed reduction of the evacuation radius from ten miles to one mile. A change of this magnitude would be tantamount to an outright waiver of the regulation. I can scarcely believe the applicant expects its proposal to be taken seriously.

Today's emergency planning requirement has been part of the nuclear regulation landscape since 1980. It was, of course, part of the legacy of Three Mile Island. I had just become chairman of the Senate Environment Committee's Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation. In the first hours after the accident at THI, we learned that Pennsylvania had no plan for evacuating the vicinity of the plant.

That same spring, I introduced an amendment to the annual budget authorization for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. That amendment said no nuclear power plant would be licensed until the state in which it was located had an NRC-approved plan for dealing with a nuclear emergency. The amendment was adopted in ecmmittee and upheld in three full Senate votes.

I might add that much of the Senate floor debate at that time (July 17, 1979) anticipated the arguments that have since been raised in objection to emergency planning requirments. But a bipartisan majority of the Senate clearly wanted to see the individual states devise and test plans for protecting the public health and safety in the event of a nuclear accident.

While I can appreciate the frustration felt by applicants who cannot compell their states' cooperation, our responsibility as public officials is to protect -- and protect fully -- the public health and safety.

8703030093 870226 PDR COMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE PDR /

t. '

Moreover larger emergen,cy planning zonethe evidence clearly indicates we need a Chernob not a smaller one. At miles. Even yl, evacuations so were r

car-ied out to a distance of 18 many thousands potentially dama,ging levels of radiation of residents were exposed to In theWill 10 miles. wakewe, of Three Mile Island, we set th deadly accident) e radius at emergency zone? seriously contemplate shrinking thein the wa In a related case asked to approve themselves. emerge,ncy plans prepared by ththe commissi e applicants zone, they do not include guarantees state and local officials.

of particiWhile th

-radius pation by has been submitted for the Shoreham plantI am informed that such a pla that a utility-produced applicants. plan may be submittin New York, and ed by the Seabrook debate over emergency planninge and inWe discussed su 1979-1980 authorization bills.

the emergency plan. writing subsequent NRC The It is, point here is not the authorship of rather, plan can and will be carried conferee on the 1979-1980 bill out. public assurance that a I believe that every public to have that assurance. wanted the Congress and the plan stands a chance of orderlynoexecutionMy evacuation persona local officials are involved fromounless start t By and finish.state will ride to prescription the rescue for chaos. in the eleventh u

c officials r is a houcontrast, an of the fear nuclear power engendersHaving n on, I am mindful just returned fro Such uncertainty has no place inanda safety soci tgovernment's urge you to dispel any doubts by upholding the y suchI as ours..

letter of the emergency evacuation planni e spirit and the ng regulations.

Si erel ,

, k W GARY ART

> )