ML19322E468

Requests Investigation Into Matl of Encl 800220 Ltr from Constituent J Bayless

ML19322E468
Person / Time
Site:	Bailly
Issue date:	03/15/1980
From:	Bayh B SENATE
To:	NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
References
NUDOCS 8003280154
Download: ML19322E468 (2)

Text

_ _ _

,,,],_*

~

,s .ee.+.

..u.i s.e. ..

• " * " ^

L "nacun uu: ::2 .yg

?"* ** "* _

=:

!2

! c3 ,

VJn(tCD S talCd M ClialC 4

[ .q g; 4

g

~~

=

2 usnac gg i 51980>

4 i

==g.== MEMORANDUM

. ._. i 15:  ?:; g

+:-: 4

+;s;;

Please note the attached letter from a 2 g; .;;;.;

~

constituent forwarded to you for any consider- I would is ation the correspondence may warrant.

ris i =e .== greatly appreciate your checking into this matter.

, ;;+:

~

Upon completion of your investigation, pleaseadv ..It and return the original letter in an envelope "r

~~"

"'" marked to the attention of the h is_lative_ Mail _

Sec tion _.

== Your assistance in this matter is appreciated.

Sincerely,

. :. +

Birch Bayh

United States Senator ATTN

Nora Coulter Ef:9

=j

==-

..?..

=r .u-- = = -

ui.=ii-

.: . ...,. 3/10...To ED0 For Direct Rep 1y... Suspense: March 21...

.; ~ ,.:3 .:..

.  :.=;.;::

. Cpys to: OGC, Docket, OCA to Ack.. 80-0455.

- .b::. :55 __

?'

~

t iry

DOCMET NUMBER

~

PROD, & UTIL FAC.h

• W

' ~-

8925 Indian Boundary S

1. e

, Gary, Ind. 46403

+

Feb. 20, 1980 g ccenno

\.1' usaac Sen. Birch Bayh .., M G " ,9 1

42 U.S. Senatt Offic't -Hu'ilding # i 51980 , ~

t yy.j$N f

~

Washington, D.C. 20510 -

C3 Branch

Dear Sen. Bayh:

,N e

,J a I thank you for' your prompt and infornativt reply to my concerns about the Bailly I Fuelcar plant. I apolaud your efforts tn obtain a nuclear power noratorium, your support of statt participation in the nuclear waste disunsal probltns, and your amendnent providine criminal ut altics for violetion of "RC safEtv regulations. You are on track, and I anpreciate it.

Your letter, hnwcver, dots not address the ain question that I raised in av letter to President Carttr, a copy of which vnu rcccived.

The Bailly plant is "CT an " Existing pla-t." Its construction permit was issutd in 1974, after hearings, and it was authorized under sitine criteria that bear little restchlance to the criteria nnw rtec-ended by "RC staff in regard to population in 10-milt, 20-mile, and 30-milt radii of the sitt. "IPSCO's construction permit cTpired last September with about 1 per cent of construction complettd, mainly a few pilines that do not reach bedrock as "IPSCO promised in its anulicatirn for the utrnit. NIPSCO is asking "rEntwal" of the pernit a-d "RC is considerihg that request, whereas it shculd be treated as a new anulication subject to current siting recuirements, sincE so little of the project has hEtn completed.

May I cuott froT DV letter to the President:

"...("RC) Staff says the safety issucs carnot be ennsidered until

, an outrating lictrst is applied for, after thc plant is cenpleted at a cost of 31.1 billion which the utility will then expcet to collect fron its custnztrs, including nc.

. "Can you or anvopt Elst tell at why a billion-dollar plant should be conulettd before IGC can decidt whether it should bc permitted to currate?"

My cuestion remains unansurred. Could you, as a United States

! Srnstnr, put this cuestion to the FRC and possibly get an answer? ISC wnn't listt- tn the many petitioners who art aski g full evidentiary hearings befort it nakes a new decision on the Bailly plant.

Yours sin ~ctrtly,

</h &fwh4 John Bay 1 ss s A an w[