ML20010H565

Urges Commission Review of Aslab 810616 Decision on Seismic Design

ML20010H565
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	07/29/1981
From:	Panetta L HOUSE OF REP.
To:	Palladino N NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML20010H564	List: ML20010H565
References
NUDOCS 8109250247
Download: ML20010H565 (1)

Text

_

w ,

f # PAN. M - .A_ .

. .S. o. , . n. . 5. .,.M.--._, . 3 ._ ..,.,,_ -

r. - - . . .

25 WMl Congregg of tije Unittb 5tc.tts g; r Lg*isuftw save os ,a.sar PO.CC.

• %T.L*,* Douse of Represtutatibes Tir

• • • • 2"2'17 "" Eastingt:m,3a.C. 20515 . $<TiTTTJ Nr.-

• 9C;

. -g. y sc-

./m-wc - % ._

. July 29,g1931 Y. < w m.

w - o.c. m i - -te- U+ e-;n i-uno is.= .j >;- . . ~, *;

Honorable Nunzio palladino, Chairman ..

La 35 Nuclear Regulatorv Commission .J.9. ~

• • 'M r? 2 3 9M = C Washington, D.C. '0555 2 .h.

' ' [' [c . s.

Dear Chairman Palladino:

i-

~~

k ^j db

&j

.nCn,+- .s -

Q . : ..

I am: writing.to follow-up on my lette_r;of- dly 3 10,~ 1981, . in which (e -

I requested that the Commiss'en conduct :a5 comprehensive review of '

- l the Lic~ensing Board's low power dsdi E 6hfin~.the-case of the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant, in accifraahesjith ~ the procedures it .u. ..

instituted following the accident it'?ThteetMile " Island.

~

d f,rr,j' ' '..~

' ~

As you know, in the period since my,.1hst 1e'tter, the Licetsiv Board has issued a decision which would antihorize low power t a sting /

% In addition to my earlier request that the, Commission exerci:- full

~

review of the Licensing Board decis'i~on, I bElieve it is appropriate and important for the Commission sto: conduct; a thqrough, substantive t review of the seismic issues by granting th'e. recently filed petition t'or review of ceismic issues. I would urge the Commission to take briefs and hear ors '. arguments , 'if request-ed, by all af f ected parties.

I.t is my understanding that pursuant to its regulations, the Commission does not generslly grant review of its Appeals Board decisions unless the case in 3 u'estion appears to involve an important matter which could, significantly affect the environment, or public health and safety. In my view, and'that of many citi: ens.who reside in the communities adjacent to Diablo Canyon, there is no more important or.significant issue than the ability of the Diablo facilitySince to withstand seismicity is the a 7.5 magnitude earthquake on the Hosgri. fault.

central safety issue in the licensing. proceedings, and the one with I urge the most saliency for the people directly affected by the plant, to allow you to review the seismic decision of the Appeals Board and not any low power testing until the seismic issue has been resolved.

The Diablo Canyon plant was constructed before the existence cf the Hosgri fault was documented and would not be sited there today given the present st' ate of knowledge.andI believe we owe it to the residents the state of California to take every of the affected communities the Diablo facility is capable of

~

possible precaution to insure that _ ,-

withstanding a 7. 5 magnitude earthqtake.

I appreciate your consideration of this issue and will look forward to hearing from you. .n . _ , .

' ~ ~ ~

8109250247 810916 /

PDR ADOCK 05000275 g LE0.' V )E . PANETTA U PDR \e80er of Congress LEP:tod er- Compinioners