ML20151R379
| ML20151R379 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 03/21/1988 |
| From: | Connelly L CALIFORNIA, STATE OF |
| To: | Zech L NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20151R363 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8804270308 | |
| Download: ML20151R379 (2) | |
Text
916 445 5150
'lAR 21 '68 1.7t4S RAYEC1 CRPITOL P.1 O
g
,CAv e T R ONG 9w =.. =. _, =...
Assemblu Galifornia Egislature an om.
S CIW h TO G N,49 0X4 LLOYD G. CONNELLY MEMBEM op THE trGlotAfWE INETH ASSEMt4Y DSTl%CT t
March 21, 1988 Chairman Lando W.
Zeeh, Jr.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1717 11 Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20006
Dear Chairman Zech:
I am writing to you as a concerned leaders of Sacramento to respectfully urge that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission give especially sericus consideration to the unusual safety issues surrounding t)e Sacramento Municipal Utility District's (SMUD) raquest for low-power restarting of the
)
Rancho Seco Nuclear Power Plant.
There are two Rancho Seco measures on the June, 1988 ballot.
One would mandate that the Rancho Seco plant be immediately shut down.
The other would permit the plants continued operation for an eighteen month trial assuming certain opecified levels of operation were met.
The SMUD Board of Directors opposes the former and supports the latter.
believe For their position to prevail in June, most people without problems from the timethe Rancho Seco plant cust operate continually an of restart through June 7th.
This political reality places tremendous incentive and pressure on SMUD to keep the Rancho Seco plant of any apparent defects, safety considerations, andfunctioning in spite mafntenance and capital improvement needs.
One SMUD Board Director, for example, proposed at the March 4th SMUD Board of Directors meeting that required maintenance and capital improvement expenditures for the next three months be deferred until the results of the June electlon are known.
This interim attitt' safety in dangerous and shortsighted.
of economics over Mr. Chairman, I respectfully request restart of the Rancho Seco plant before June 7th be evaluated solely on public safety considerations.
Commiasion has always been primarily concerned thatThe Nuclear Regulatory the nation's nuclear power plants he operated safely.
I urge you 8804270300 080410 PDR ADOCK 05000312 P
PDR 4>'
I
!%R 21 'S% (7i46 HAYDEN CAPITA P.2 r
r..
u+'
to maintain the NRC's tradition &l Commitment to public safety.
Very Truly Yours, 7"
~W LLOYD G.
CONNELLY Member of the Assembly