ML16340A621

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Discusses Actions Subsequent to 791018 Meeting W/Util.Util Concerns That Facility Was Singled Out for Unique Procedural Treatment Re TMI-related Issues Are Groundless
ML16340A621
Person / Time
Site: Diablo Canyon  Pacific Gas & Electric icon.png
Issue date: 10/24/1979
From: Hendrie J
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML16340A622 List:
References
NUDOCS 7910310312
Download: ML16340A621 (2)


Text

~gg AKgI

/g CHAIRMAN UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGUI ATORY COiYiivlISSION WASHINGTCN 0 C 20c October 24, 1979 FROM:

SUBJECT:

Files l~

Joseph M. Hendrie I

ACTIO<IS SUBSi i,"j,,Q MiiTING ITH OFFIC ii S

." PACIFIC GAS FLECTRIC ON OCTOBiR 19,.1979 Thi 5 note 1 s 1 n enG d "0 coI"ple e

h I

0.

n "h I":,e

. ng wl

.". PG>Ii 4

cffic'ials on Oc=ober I &, Ig";9, and my subse

.e. t act ons..s sue.;.ary 0-;

that meetillg nas Oeen pl epaI ed at my request bY M.. Donald I. Hassei I

my 'gal Assistant..

Late in the afternoon of Octooer 19th, I caIled the Director/ERR.

Mr.

Denton was ou" and I talked to Mr. idson Case, Depu y Director/NRR.

inouired as to the status of the Diablo Canyon case.

! told Mr. Case of th PGKi concern that Diablo Canyon mioht be sincled ou for some sort of unique procedural treatment with regard to Three Mile Island-related

issues, and that the NRC staff members mos fam-1-ar with Diablo Canyon might not be availab7e for urther work on the case.

Mr. Case said that Diablo Canyon was being treated

-.-.om a procedural standpoint in the same way as other well-advanceG operating Iicense applications

'.n wnicn there were ongoing proceedings before a Licensin"

Board, and that staff members familiar with the case would continue to work on it:o the extent practical in view of the many demands on s af; time.

He said that Diablo Canyon had recen.ly been discussed by the ACRS and that further discussions we. e planned with ACRS on tne project.

I told Mr. Case I "hough'. the staff should continue 'its work on Diablo Canyon just as it was doing.

I suggested tne staff should try.o be well-prepared for the cominc ACRS meeting, sine my own experience on the ACRS indicated that a high quality staf>

presentation to the

~CRS would best serve the objec.ive o

reaching an ar',y d

':sion on th application.

On Monday, October 22nd, the General Counsel informed me of his cohcerns about the nature of the meeting with PGKE.