ML20037D385
| ML20037D385 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 06/29/1981 |
| From: | Tenebaum R AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| To: | Bechhoefer C Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8107100169 | |
| Download: ML20037D385 (1) | |
Text
- _
DOCKET flUMBER PROD.& UTIL FAC..k.* h.a..D i
/
~
,.y San Antom.o f orunt on anergy 5106 Cas40io3JS'aTn Ahtonio, Tex. 78233. (512) 653 0543 V
h hk Q
heg\\
~~ I
\\
E1 June 29, 1981 5 sd
?
p*e d
.suL' 8Iggy, 2
-2 us.
t
. A-g~
O!.eu q y
Charles Bechhoefer, Es
,s M,.b[g' Board Chairman, Atomic Safety
'C2 ';,- j['80'eh8 ft*-
D03 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission q
Washington, D.C.
20555 (P
Dear Mr. Bechhoefers.
It has been brought to our.attentFon that a request for siting of September hearings for the South Teias Nuclear Project in Austin, Texas, has been twice denied. It is my understanding that reasons given included the fact that Austin airline schedules are not as convenient as those for Houston and the
~ ' ^ fact that Houston Lighting and Power is located in' Houston.
A-
. si a 9-p.,
-g
^
The San Antonio Forum on Energy believes that reasons for denial of the re-quest are insignificant compared lto'those that prompted the request. These
' Q.,
include:.
E3
. T 1~
t i
- 1) The fact tiht CCANP, one of[the intervEinors, will not'be represented if
~~
~ hearings are not held 7 in Aust!inidue' to coun'sel's' attendance at law ' school in A.tstin. '
-' r
./.
a f '.;
y
~
. - (.
i 2) The Austin City Council passed,.two weeks ago, a man 4maus resolution thata
~
~ ~"
' a formal' city request be made to hold the hearings in Austin, largely due to
.c.~. 6 ;..y 'the great interest in the subf e.on the part of Austin's citizens.
- g&' v,., e
~- y r-
- ...,7.
r:
+
.c.=>
y n e-95,; '
3)' There has been a disproportionate period set aside for hearings in' Houston,. '
San Antonio and Bay City have i~~k@.
- ~which far exceeds Houston's share'in the plant.had only token weeks for the hearings a
?
from a two-day pre-hearing conference, unpublicized, last March.
On the basis of the above we urge you to reconsider your decision not to hold the Septunber hearings in Austin. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, like the Atomic Energy Commission before it, has all along been too closely identified with pro-nuclear interests; your recent decision, if unchanged, can only fur-ther that impression and make still difficult the nearly impossible task of citizen intervention.
I thank you for your consideration and await a reply.
Yours sincerely, h
I R. Betsy Tenenbaum, Ph.De A
Acting President 8107100169 810629 San Anton40 Forum on Energy PDR ADOCK 05000499 G
__