ML20204C298

From kanterella
Revision as of 06:47, 7 December 2021 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Supports Commonwealth of Ma 860715 Petition to Show Cause Why OL Should Not Be Modified,Suspended or Revoked. Significant Questions Raised Re Deficiencies of Facility Containment Structure & Emergency Response Plan
ML20204C298
Person / Time
Site: Pilgrim
Issue date: 03/20/1987
From: Oleskey S
MASSACHUSETTS, COMMONWEALTH OF
To: Taylor J
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE)
Shared Package
ML20204C300 List:
References
2.206, NUDOCS 8703250269
Download: ML20204C298 (2)


Text

,_ _

b THE COMMONWEALTH OF MACACHUZETTS b '

DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL JOHN W. McCoRMACK STATE OFFICE BUILDING

.' oNE ASHBURToN PLACE. BOSTON 02108-1698 JAMES M. SHANNON ATTORNEY OENERAL March 20, 1987 Mr. James M. Taylor, Director Office of Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ,

Washington, D.C. 20555 Re: Petition for Show Cause Concerning Pilgrim I Nuclear I Power Station (Submitted July 15, 1986)

Dear Director Taylor:

I am writing to express the support of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts for the above referenced petition which was submitted to you on July 15, 1987 pursuant to 10 C.F.R.

S52.202 and 2.206. The Commonwealth shares the safety concerns outlined in the petition and urges the NRC to promptly institute the requested proceeding to show cause why Boston Edison's license to operate the Pilgrim I Nuclear Power Station should not be modified, suspended, or revoked.

Significant questions have been raised about the deficiencies of the facility's containment structure, the inadequacy of the Pilgrim I radiological emergency response plan, and the inability of Boston Edison to manage the facility in such a way as to provide a reasonable assurance of safety.

These questions, which, in part, were raised by the NRC's Systematic Assessment of License Performance report, bear directly on the public safety and welfare of the citizens of the Commonwealth and must be resolved before any determination is made to allow the Pilgrim I Nuclear Power State to restart.

Massachusetts State Senator Golden has provided this office with copies of your December 19, 1986 letter responding to the petition, as well as a February 20, 1987 letter from Mr. Thomas E. Murley, Regional Administrator to Senator Golden. I am attaching a copy of Senator Golden's response to Mr. Murley. This office shares in Senator Golden's view that the NRC has failed to meet its obligation Qt$

0703250269 B70320 gDR ADOCK05000g3

$ {g)

I i l

e Mr. James M. Taylor, Director March 20, 1987 Page.Two to determine in a timely manner whether or not it will issue the requested order to show cause. Pursuant to 10 CFR 52.206, such a determination must be made "within a reasonable time after a request" for such an order has been received. Eight months have now passed and the Commonwealth submits that an order initiating a show cause proceeding, not a letter promising a " meeting," is overdue. Accordingly, this office believes a timely order should be issued.

Very truly yours, JAMES M. SHANNON Attorney General Commonwealth of Masssachusetts By: [

Stephen Oldskey Deputy Attorney e eral GBD/bk i

1