ML20058N252
| ML20058N252 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 08/02/1990 |
| From: | Rossin A ENVIRONMENTAL & RESOURCES CONSERVATION ORGANIZATION |
| To: | Murley T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9008130322 | |
| Download: ML20058N252 (2) | |
Text
__.
".w
. w
$Yv[
ENVIRONNENTAL CONSERVATION OkGANISATION Suite 320 101 First Street Los Altos, CA, 94022
)
August 2, 1990 Dr. Thomas E. Murley, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission i
Washington, DC 20555 i
DOCKET NO. 50-312 Rancho Seco Generating Station NRC LETTER TO A. D. ROSSIN, July 31, 1990
]
l
Dear Dr. Murley,
The Environmental Conservation Organization (ECO) wishes to express its appreciation to you and Chairman Carr for your letter of July 31, 1990.
ECOconsiderstherequest[ ora"possessiononly"licensetobe a step toward decommissioning of the Ranch Seco Nuclear Plant.
Granting permission for decommissioning would seem clearly to be a major Federal action.
Our request for notification refers to any r-7uests or applications which lead toward that major federal action.
I appreciate receiving a copy of NUREG-0586.
This is a document with which several of ECO's people, including myself, are quite familiar.
It is a useful document.
However, it was written for permanent decommissioning of a plant after l
completion of its useful life.
As the record shows, and we note further below, Rancho Seco is far from the potential end of its useful life.
There are alternatives'for a plant which could return safely to commercial service other than those ir.
NUREG-0586, so that report cannot be considered complete for the purposes of analyzing this situation.
It is important that all parties recognize that the voters of the CMUD did not vote that the Rancho Seco plant should not
]
operate, but only that SMUD should not operate it.
The same Directors who championed the shutdown of the plant fought steadily to thwart efforts by other parties to come up with a plan for operating it.
That referendum was far from a final decision on the fate of the plant.
Many who voted for it l
believed that others would operated the plant in the future as I
nnn-an 9008130322 900802 PDR ADOCK 05000312 O.
P PDC g[N b
- 4f M 't fI f.
a nuclear generating station.
This makes the SMUD--referendum i
- very d fferent'from those which have been attempted (and s
.. failed) in'other states.-
K:
L lt appreciate'your: statement that the,NRC Rancho Seco Project Manager,will attempt to notify me, as ECO's Coordinator. -My
=
telephone,at 415-948-7939 is equipped with an answering machine which is on at all _ times, so I am confident that his attempts -
r 1
will ultimately be successful.
3 J
Sincerely,
,,,7 '
(
m b/(
q
[
Environmente' 7anservation Organization l
I cc:
Hon. Kenneth Carr, C?nsicman, USNRC Chairman, Board-of. Directors, SMUD
'I E
- S. David Freeman, General Manager, SMUD Ramon Ashley - Resident of.Folsom, CA,~in the SMUD.
I MiltonLLevenson---(Former President, American Nuclear
-Society)
A. David Rossin - Coordinator, ECO (Former Asst.-Secretary e
of Energy)'
j E
i 4
1 EE-r ml:
4 7
=
i:
I
.