ML20138F930
| ML20138F930 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 11/08/1985 |
| From: | Fogelman M CALIFORNIA, STATE OF |
| To: | Felton J NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| References | |
| FOIA-84-516, RTR-NUREG-1055 NUDOCS 8512160201 | |
| Download: ML20138F930 (2) | |
Text
__
~
,=agw-1 e_
~_
m::':c...:,'2yf; public Mtilities sommission STATE OF C A LIFORNI A November 8, 1985 eu aa (LC' h\\g{G J. M. Felton
\\g6 s
Division of Rules and Records Office of Administration United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Re:
FOIA-84-516
Dear Mr. Felton:
i The Public Staff Division of the California Public Utilities Commission is charged by statute with the responsibility of representing the interests of California ratepayers in proceedings before that Commission.
One such proceeding, presently pending, is Application No. 84-06-014, which involves the proposed addition to rate base of the costs expended by Pacific Gas and Electric Co. in the design, construction, licensing, etc., of the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant.
The costs involved are close to $6 billion.
As you are probably aware, although the NRC maintains " control of the safety and
' nuclear' aspects of energy generation, the States exercise their traditional authority over.
ratemaking."
Pacific Gas
& Electric Co.
v.
Energy Resources Commission, 461 U.S.
- 190, 212 (1983).
See also id., at 205-212.
In his letter dated June 19, 1984, Mr. Edward O' Neill, Sta ff Counsel, requested a broad range of documents concerning or used in the preparation of the study " Assurance of Quality in Nuclear Construction Projects" (NUREG-1055) and the case studies pertaining thereto.
While your agency has provided some documents in response to Mr. O'Neill's request, few, if any of them, have pertained to the Diablo Canyon plant presently under our review.
Case Study C in NUREG-1055, which evaluates some of the problems at the Diablo Canyon plant, reaches conclusions which, if documented, may prove to be of considerable significance in our review of the reasonableness of Diablo Canyon costs.
While we still desire the documents described in Mr. O'Neill's request of June 19, 1984, we, and the millions of California ratepayers on whose behalf we are acting, have an immediate and urgent need for each of the documents, records and other information upon which the conclusions in Case Study C are based.
More than 15 months ago, on July 10, 1984, in a telephone conference call-with Linda Robinson, William Altman, William Brach, and Wayne Scott of your agencydocum. O'Neill specifically asked that an Mr earlyrreview of the ents supporting the case ~ studies be 8512160201 851108 PDR FOIA O'NEILL84-16 PDR
o conducted.
Mr. Altman indicated this might take from 1 to 4 months.
Ms. Robinson also indicated that we night be permitted to inspect documents not placed in the Public Documents Room.
However, to date, none of these critical documents supporting the conclusions of Case Study C has been provided to us.
Please provide us immediately with a list of all documents, records and other information upon which the conclusions of Case Study C are based.
We also ask that your provision of documents to us be without charge in accordance with 10 C.F.R. 59.14a(a)(2).
Thank you for giving this matter your immediate attention.
Very truly y rs, Q,k Z l 4 * * *--*
Mark Fogelman Staff Counsel MF:sas cc:
David Meyer, NRC Edward O'Neill, CPUC Bruce DeBerry, CPUC
-