ML20009B821
| ML20009B821 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| 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) | |
Text
--2,Ug Y
' """'"'14= **m em.H u s 50.M M 3:23 '~~I~o ;""a n
% FR.17216)the Unittb SDtatc5 lu f
7~~. E 'O 'ROPOSED RULE '
P
= =-->
v,ungreddat
~
~
r"",*,".;,,
rmswr 3!)ottge of Representatibes
..m eo-nm
-, -. e _
W awm tamcunc House ggipriou 6Ess'fjtngton, 33.C. 20515..,,,, m n m.m.c -
'00903ED KULE S..
moarry acciosa.wk,.
Jul gi g
(% FR RoFu5y,;-~= _
~~
- FOstD RULE l yi g\\
~,
p.
Honorable @NunzioQ pg g'j }e/
s-,.e.a.c -
S (son > mm g((?#gl2 -
To,g alladi aq Nuclear Regulatory ~ Commi 3 11 Weshington, D.C.
20555
.g'^~"
9 9.*-
@j ej
Dear Chairman Palladino:
A c.w <" **.P
,g I am writing to offer my congI%ky p'ej,Gaeions on /.ourg.pintment.as c
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 concern to the residents of the area, many of whom are my constituents.
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 s
the plant 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 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
-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 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 M
7/13...To OGC To Prepare Reply fer Commission review
- 6. Signature
/
5 Date due Comm: July 27s..RF, Docket, EDO, Chm, OCA to Acknowledge../I 81-0914, 8107170203 810710 POR ADOCK 05000275 H
PDR i.
,/'
_.Ppge Two t
c o
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, _
3l % FR W2l cv.=r m' r. b PRCD. L UTIL FAC.dh.N. *:~";M
- ~"C PROP 0stD RULE y.-
w^-a==. o c msit 1 u < = > = = "1"Q con.- L W grtss O fijc E nitcD e6 tatc$ fEL=~&%=" ,ll"""", ~,;', holl%t at.Etytt%tntatibt% nancrw--nne . cm-..: > > ~ ~ 4==>cueumc wousc g r p riou EEasi.dngton, D.C. 20515,., ci n 3 um.>,=. em ED RULE - g s._<=.> e _ (% FR ROE 15M,*J , cm wuonerneciosu.w;n,. July 10, 1981 n' twnn 3 g m> m 'W (fD RULEj %3 [ ' 0) (o p 9 m) += t sant. cama, cmroman Honorable' Nun:lo allad ,g ~, ^ Nuclear Regulatory Commi <\\ b,,,c g\\ - q Washington, D.C. 20555 h G f g % g,y g '
Dear Chairman Palladino:
M c ed& v [. I am writing to offer my c ratulatiIn's'nf.au o ntment as ?? Chairman of the Nuclear Regu br opportunity to share my views on $ 6minission 'a'nd to take this N 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 concern to the residents of the area, many of whom are my constituents. After the commencement of construction,'a seismically active earthquake fault was discovered only two and 1 a half miles from the plant. i and Ap' peal Board has recently ruled thatWhile the Atomic Safety Licensing the plant is capable of kithsitanding the impact of.an earthquake on the Hosgri fault, a 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 -well as insuring publicM onfidence in the regulatory process. In j recent weeks, the, Commission has implemented an administrative l rulemaking which eliminates the Appeal Board effectiveness review, i allowing the decision of the Licensing Board to become immediately l 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 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 QOO 7/13...To OGC To Prepare Reply for Commission review &. Signature k Date due Comm: July 27,..RF, Docket, EDO, Chm, OCA to Acknowledge... 81-0914, ....m ~
'Y i... Page Two a. 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 pg a. u in :%0. dd. N % M c- _,. o.m.a. i % FR.172l
- ~ e c =
(,.. 'A. 1_".". PROP 03t0 EULE congrtds a tfje Uniteb Starts Z""' ~;";
==" ..c _ =,m o~ .dLT*W floust at.Etytt%:ntatibc6 _,,. m A G HOULTUMc l\\% '~)"*" H u t4 CIOs N revac as, memariou Eastnigion, s3.C. 20515.* O 3 co cc m > -o ('e'= 'NED RULE 0 s v. co wuemry acciow.wm,. (o JuivQ, s,i (% FR ROEI5) ',".". m 19' < u as num 33 ae ' b y R',ly sm>uw u
- 4ED RULE l iI Y,Q Honorable (Nunzio4.alladin30MCl ~o
\\O %.. e i' %F 5"'ca: c^ a -" NuclearRegulatoryCommissSnh{\\p [s@, qd M 4 p Was hington, D. C. 20555 ,y, %, . p
Dear Chairman Palladino:
'* f cW' V cu / K I am writing to offer my congra. ' %ns o' nsycyr.c ppin/ Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Cennission and;.-ro take this ntment as 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 concern to the residents of the area, many of whom are my constituents. 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 Commission procedures. scrupulous application of 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 -well as insuring puKlicd onfidence in the regulatory process. as 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 reactors and their actual licensing. of time between completion 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 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 f HOS 7 /13... T o OGC To Prepare Reply for Co==ission review
- 6. S ign at u re s.
Date due Comm: July 27,..'RF, Docket, EDO, Chn, OCA *o Acknowledg ../6 81-0914, i I
Y-Psge Two t .\\ 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 = = _}}