ML20062G869
| ML20062G869 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 02/01/1979 |
| From: | Bowman D AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| To: | Bowers E, Bright G, Martin W Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20062G873 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7903050004 | |
| Download: ML20062G869 (1) | |
Text
'J ~,
g;*
'3 p
David M Bswnan g-4 Box 738
/
' M,p g[T '
'gg EIiBLIC 3erkeley, CA 94701 0
o P
t '.,;. e[.
CCU3lLF,e,bruary 1,1979
{
j.
Q 1
af g
C v.
c.,ren.... 1-. -
gj_
Atomic Cafety and. ' -
, a ca rd
,;,,,4 ; g y,; fp i pp p,g y g g Luclear negulatory Commisicn
/
I.andow Building, Rocn 1209
'iashingten, D.C. 20555
-j
Dear l's. Bowe rs,
Dr. l'artin and l'r. Bright:
In regards to the hearings concerning the Diable Canyon nuclear facility in San Luis Cbispo County, Californian I was unable to attend the public hearings them, but vrould like to go on record opposing the ce==issioni 6 of trat plant as a nuclear facility.
I see it as your duty to erisure tie safety of ths people in the San
'.uis Obispo area and in California by seeing to it that the facility at Diablo Canycn is sufficiently strcr g to withstcnd the ::nxi=u.
Yoa shculd settle for no less.
possible earthcuake at thet site.
I understand that nuclear por:er generating facilities can be converted to a non-nuclear fuel scurce ( at considerable expense, to be sure )
and it seems to me that this alternative should be assessed as it r.ny prove much cheapar than.reinfercing the entire structure te withstand ten times the energy release that it was designed for.
Finally, I am not convinced that the extra generating capacity of this plant is necessary.
rours,
= g3......,
gg 790305000'