ML20009B821

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR2 Re Facility Licensing. Commission Should Conduct Comprehensive Review Prior to Making Decision Re Licensing
ML20009B821
Person / Time
Site: Diablo Canyon  Pacific Gas & Electric icon.png
Issue date: 07/10/1981
From: Panetta L
HOUSE OF REP.
To: Palladino N
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
References
FRN-46FR17216, FRN-46FR20215, FRN-46FR30349, RULE-PR-2 45FR17216-721, 45FR20215-114, 45FR20215-11A, 45FR30349-62, 46FR17216-721, 46FR20215-114, 46FR30349-62, NUDOCS 8107170203
Download: ML20009B821 (2)
v • d • e


Text

    • m --2, Ug ....,......._., _

Y ' """'"'14= n em.H u s 50.M M 3:23 '~~I~o ;""a

" P lu f = =-->

7~~. Ermswr 'O 'ROPOSEDv,ungreddat  % FR.17216)the Unittb SDtatc5 RULE '

~

~

r"",*,".;,,

..m eo- nm 3!)ottge of Representatibes - , - . e _ . ,,,

tamcunc W awm House ggipriou 6Ess'fjtngton, 33.C. 20515.. ,,,, m n m .m.c -

moarry acciosa.wk,.

'00903ED KULE S .. ,'

~~

Jul gi g (% FR RoFu5y,;-~= _

  • FOstD RULE l yi g\ ~, p. -

Honorable @NunzioQgp g'j }e/

s-,.e.a.c -

S (son > mm Nuclear Regulatory ~ Commi 3 alladi aq '

To,g Weshington, D.C. 20555 g((?#gl2 -.g'^~" 11

Dear Chairman Palladino:

9 9.*- @j ej

,g c

A c.w <" **.P I am writing to offer my congI%ky p'ej ,Gaeions on /.ourg .pintment.as

o Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission an'd'.-to take this opportunity to share my views on the licensing process with respect'to the Diablo Canyon facility.

As you may know, the status of the Diablo Canyon plant is a matter of great my concern to the residents of the area, many of whom are constituents.

After the commencement of construction,'a a half miles from the plant. fault was discovered only two and seismically active earthquake s

and Ap' peal Board has recently ruled thatWhile the theAtomic plantSafety Licensing is capable

- of withstanding the impact of an earthquake on the Hosgri fault,

- the unique issues associated with Diablo and the high level of community concern warrant

, Commission procedures. the most scrupulous application of I have a number carefully of yearsfollowed now. Itthe proceedings with respect to Diablo for has always been my position that since the licensing decision will be made by the NRC, its procedures must be carefully followed ,in order to insure the safety of the plant as

- -well as insuring public-confidence in the regulatory process. In

~

recent weeks, the. Commission has implemented an administrative rulemaking which eliminates the Appeal Board effectiveness review, allowing the decision of the Licensing Board to become immediately effective without comprehensive Commission review. This action was taken in an attempt to redhce'the amount of time between completion of reactors and their actual licensing.

It is my firm belief that because of the Diablo Canyon facility's unique history, its proximity to an active earthquake fault and the high level of concern in the community, that it would be most appro-priate for the Commission to utilize the procedures which it insti-tuted in effect afteruntil the the accident recent at rulemaking.

Three Mile Island and which have been

' I am sure you can appreciate how a change in procedure near the end of the licensing process is a cause for concern among many in the 7/13...To OGC To Prepare Reply fer Commission review 6. Signature M 5 Date 81-0914, due Comm: July 27s..RF, Docket, EDO, Chm, OCA to Acknowledge../I/

8107170203 810710 POR ADOCK 05000275 H PDR i.

, ,/'

t _.Ppge Two c o l cot: unity. Because of the unique characteristics of the Diablo facility, I believe it would be most appropriate for the Conmission to conduct its customary, comprehensive review of the Licensing Board de~ cision before a licensing decision is made. In my view, the Diablo case warrants the most careful review and deserves the benefit of the Commission's considerable expertise. Full Commission review cf the licensing decision could be expedited with little negative impact on the time frame'for a licensing decision, We are now at the point where a decision on low power is imminent after years of hearings and procedural review. It seems most appropriate at this time to do everything within the Commission's authority and customary practice to assure all the interested parties that the most rigorous examination of the issues has been acccmplished. Thus, I would strongly urge that the Commission take this opportunity to fully review the Licensing Board decision.

Once again, I look forward to working with you in the future and hope that you will give this request your most careful consideration, Sinravely, LEON 5 PANETTA Membe of Congress 1

~~

lEP:t'od 1

I __

m v.~w , _ cv.=r m' r.

b *:~";M y.-

  • ~"C u PROP 0stD RULE 3l % FR W2l 1

PRCD. L UTIL FAC.dh.N. w^-a==. o c msit 

                                                                                                                          <=>==
                 "1"QfEL=~&%="

con.- L W grtss O fijc E nitcD e6 tatc$ ,ll"""",* ~,;' , nancrw--nne holl%t at .Etytt%tntatibt% . cm-. .: 4==>cueumc >>~~ um.>,=. em wousc g r p riou EEasi.dngton, D.C. 20515,., ci n 3 . ED RULE , - g s._<=.> , cm e= wuonerneciosu.w;n,. July 10, 1981 n' twnn _ (%gFR ROEm> 15M,*J 3 ' m t'W (fD(oRULEj p %3 [ ' 0), 

                                                                                              ,g          9 sant. cama, cmroman m) +=

Honorable' Nun:lo allad ~, , b,,,c 

    ^

Nuclear Regulatory Commi <\ q Washington, D.C. 20555 g\ - h gG f  % g ,y g '

Dear Chairman Palladino:

M v c ed& [. I am writing to offer my c Chairman of the Nuclear Regu ratulatiIn's'nf.au 

 ??                                                                                  o                     ntment as N                                                                  br opportunity to share my views on $the           6minission licensing 'a'nd  process  to takewiththis

. respect to the Diablo Canyon facility. As you may know, the status of the Diablo Canyon plant is a matter of great concern to the residents of the area, many of whom are my constituents. After the commencement of construction,'a 1 seismically active earthquake fault was discovered only two and i a half miles from the plant. and Ap' peal Board has recently ruled thatWhile the theAtomic plant Safety is capable Licensing a of kithsitanding the impact of.an earthquake on the Hosgri fault, 

 -                      the  unique issues associated with Diablo and the high level of community concern warrant the most scrupulous application of

( Commission procedures. I have carefully followed the proceedings with respect to Diablo for a number of years now. It has always been my position that since the licensing decision will be made by the NRC, its procedures must be carefully followed in order to insure the safety of the plant as j 

                  -  -well as insuring publicM onfidence in the regulatory process. In recent weeks, the, Commission has implemented an administrative l

i rulemaking which eliminates the Appeal Board effectiveness review, allowing the effective decision of the Licensing Board to become immediately without l comprehensive Commission review. This action was taken in an attempt to redirce' the amount of time between completion of reactors and their actual licensing. It is my firm belief that because of the Diablo Canyon facility's unique history, its proximity to an active earthquake fault and the high level of concern in the community, that it would be most appro-priate for the Commission to utilize the procedures which it insti-tuted after the accident at Three Mile Island and which have been in effect until the recent rulemaking.

  • I am sure you can appreciate how a change in procedure near the end of the licensing process is a cause for concern among many in the 7/13...To OGC To Prepare Reply for Commission review &. Signature QOO k Date due Comm: July 27,..RF, Docket, EDO, Chm, OCA to Acknowledge...

81-0914, 

 ....m       ~

      'Y i
a. ... Page Two L
  • community. Because of the unique characteristics of the Diablo facility, I believe it would be most appropriate for the Commission to conduct its customary, comprehensive review of the Licensing Board de' cision before a licensing decision is made. In my view, the Diablo case warrants the most careful review and deserves the benefit of the Commission's considerable expertise. Full Commission review of the licensing decision could be expedited with little negative impact on the time frame for a licensing decision, We are now at the point where a decision on low power is imminent after years of hearings and procedural review. It seems most appropriate at this time to do everything within the Commission's authority and customary practice to assure all the interested parties that the most rigorous examination of the issues has been accomplished. Thus, I would strongly urge that the Commission take this opportunity to fully review the Licensing Board decision.

Once again, I look forward to working with you in the future and hope that you will give this request your most careful consideration, Sivra; ply, LEON r. PANETTA Membe of Congress 

            ~       "                                    ~
                      ~

l 1EP:tod 1 l - - l l l l l 1 

                                                       ~

I I I l

m. ~.p i+ = o m cr. c4* m -.=a n IL C * "' " !.T " '. " '_7 _
                    * " " " ' *
  • M **3 -E _,. o.m.a.

i PROP 03t0 EULE  % FR.172l pg a. u in :%0. dd. N % M c- *~ e c = ( , . . 'A...c1_".". ==" _ =,m o~ congrtds a tfje Uniteb Starts Z""' ~;"; 

                .dLT*W A G HOULTUMc floust at .Etytt%:ntatibc6                                                 _ ,,. m
                                                                                                                                                               '~)"*"
                                                                                                                                 '                    l\%

revac as, memariou H u t4 CIOs co cc m > Eastnigion, s3.C. 20515 .* O 3 -o N ('e' = 

                                                                                                                              'NED RULE            '

0 s v . co wuemry acciow.wm,. (o ae ',".". m Juiv 19' < u s,i as num 33 Q , (% FR ROEI5)

  • 4ED RULE l iI Y ,Q ' b i'

y R' ,ly ' sm>uw u 

                                            %F                                                    \O                     % .. e 5"'ca: c^ a -"

Honorable (Nunzio4.alladin30MCl qd M 

                                                                                                                                                ~o ' * " "

4 NuclearRegulatoryCommissSnh{\p Was hington, D. C. 20555 - p 

                                                                                                                              ,y, % ,

[s@ 

                                                                                                                                           . p

Dear Chairman Palladino:

cW' V cu / K '* f 

  .                 I am writing to offer my congra. ' %ns o' nsycyr.c ppin/ntment as Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Cennission and;.-ro take                                                                            this opportunity to share my views on the licensing process with respect to the Diablo Canyon facility.

As you may know, the status of the Diablo Canyon plant is a matter of great my constituents. concern to the residents of the area, many of whom are After the commencement of construction,~a seismically active earthquake fault was discovered only two and a half miles from the plant. and Ap~ peal Board has recently ruled thatWhile the Atomic Safety Licensing the plant is capable of kithstanding the impact of an earthquake on the Hosgri fault, the unique issues associated with Diablo and the high level of conmunity concern warrant the most scrupulous application of Commission procedures. I have a number carefully of yearsfollowed now. Itthe proceedings with respect to Diablo for has always been my position that since the licensing decision will be made by the NRC, its procedures must be carefully followed in order to insure the safety of the plant as 

            -    -well as insuring puKlicd onfidence in the regulatory process. In recent weeks, the. Commission has implemented an administrative rulemaking which eliminates the Appeal Board effectiveness review, allowing the decision of the Licensing Board to become immediately effective without comprehensive Commission review. This action was taken in an attempt to redirce' the amount of time between completion of reactors and their actual licensing.

It is my firm belief that because of the Diablo Canyon facility's unique history, its proximity to an active earthquake fault and the high level of concern in *.he community, that it would be most appro-priate for the Commissior. to utili:e the procedures which it insti-tuted in effect afteruntil the the accident recent at rulemaking. Three Mile Island and which have been I am sure you can appreciate how a change in procedure near the end of the licensing process is a cause for concern among many in the 7 /13 . . . T o OGC To Prepare Reply for Co==ission review 6. S ign at u re f HOS s. Date due Comm: July 27,..'RF, 81-0914, Docket, EDO, Chn, OCA *o Acknowledg . ../6 i 

                                    -_                       __         __ -__ - - - - -                                                                                      I

t Y-Psge Two 

 .     .\

community. Because of the unique characteristics of the Diablo facility, I believe it would be most appropriate for the Connission d to conduct its customary, comprehensive review of the Licensing Board de' cision before a licensing decision is made. In my view, the Diablo case warrants the most careful review and deserves the benefit of the Commission's considerable expertise. Full Cc= mission review of the licensing decision could be expedited with little negative impact on the time frane for a licensing decision, We are now at the point where a decision on low power is imminent after years of hearings and procedural review. It seems most appropriate at this time to do everything within the Commission's authority and customary practice to assure all the interested parties that the most rigorous examination of the issues has been accomplished. Thus, I would strongly urge that the Commission take this opportunity to fully review the Licensing Board decision. Once again, I look forward to working with you in the future and hope that you will give this request your most careful consideration. Sin-a ely, LEON F. PANETTA Membe of Congress lEP:t'od 

                                                                      =                           =

_ . _ . . _ _ . . _}}

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20009B821&oldid=2601514"