ML20234D018
Text
..
l N
7. "Y Joe F==achard, News service Branch August 21, 1963 Division of Public Information, Headquarters Rodney L. Southwick, Assistant to the Manager for Public laformation, SAN CALIPCENIA P.U.C. DENIES 3008G4 PETITION MI RLs Eoclosed ase:
l i
1.
Copy of the California Public Utilities Comunission decision denying a rehearing to Bodess Bay reactor oppa===ts; i
l 2
S. F. Chronicle story on the estion in (1); and i
3.
Istter to the Editor on Bodess.
Enclosures 1
As stated CC:]MaroldPrice, REG,_Bgt w/ enc 1s.
Robert tamaanaemin, EldA, SQ, w/encis.
F. K. Pittman, DSD, IEt, w/encle.
Boused shepar. 000, BQ, w/encls.
R. W. Sudth, Comp 1.
V., SAN, w/encis.
g-.
m: %
32,g p
,Y\\
fl
\\
\\,
i
']
kUG2. 195 S
. I :.., ;
,/ ' 3
' \\ m,.e
.u.m q\\
MI 4 f
./
SOUTHWICK:mt s"'
8/21/63 8709210491 851217 E
PDR F01A 3
7 7. FIRESTOO5-665 if PDR
1 I
l Decia on No.
65914
(
(~
l BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA In the matter of the application of PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC 4
COMPANY for a certificate of public convenience and necessity Application No. 43808
~
to construct, install, operate and maintain Unit No. 1, a nuclear pcwer unit,.at its Bodega Bay Atomic Park.
(Electric)
)
l ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR REHEARING l
I An order granting a certificate for construction of Unit 1
i I
No. 1 at applicant's Bodega Bay Atomic Park was issued on November 8, 1962.
(Decision No. 64537, effective November 28, 1962.)
Petitioner's unincorporated predecessor sought rehearing on November 28, 1962.
Rehearing was denied on January 2, 1963.
l (Decision No. 64731.)
Petitioner's predecessor thereafter filed petitions alleging violation of the certificate decision and for l
injunction.
(January 15 and 31, 1963.)
Petitions for injunction were denied on February 13, 1963 (Decision No. 64913.)
Thereafter petitioner filed a petition to reopen the proceeding for further hearing.
(May 6, 1963.)
Reopening was denied on July 9, 1963 (Decision No. 65701.)
On July 31,.1963 petitioner The Northern California Association to Preserve Bodega Head and Harbor, Inc. filed the present petition for rehearing of the order denyliig reopening.
The Commission having considered said petition and each of its
. ra
^$
4 N
(
(
ho
. c allegations, and being of the opinion that no good cause has been shown for the granting therof, IT IS ORDERED that said petition is hereby denied.
Dated at San Francisco
, California, this 20th day of August
, 1963 i
a President, I
/s/ EVERETT C. McKEAGE 1
/s/GEORGEG.GROVER 1
l
/s/ FREDERICK B. HOLOBOFF Commissioners I will file a concurring
)
l' opinion later.
/s/
PETER E. MITCHELL I would grant the relief requested.
4
/s/*WILLIAMM.BENNETT E'
l
./
1
.i 5.
l s
p,*.r---
(
.. -*{ >
(
'P4GE 22 Wednesday, Au'g. 21,'1963 :FFIE *
- i
- .. "' ' ; THE SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE" i?.
e
'!PUC Adamant v..
M Bodega Appea1
- ; Rejected Again 5
' The California Pu b1ie because of the proximity of i
^
'J1111 ties Commicslon re. the proposed site to Marin
- itsed again yesterday to county.
. econsider the Bodega Bay All but two of the 18
_i i
iower plant matter, and speakers opposed the PG&E 1
L.'ommission Chairman project as a threat to the
[; 'Villiam Bennett again dis-safety of inhabitants and a A
ented from the majority blow to the natural beauty
- ..' ole.
of the area.
' " It was'the third denial of F. F. Mautz, chief civil en.
" etitions filed by the North-gin'eer for PG&E, and At-i i
rn California Association to t ' reserve Bodega Head and torney Paul Go11s, spokes-
'. Isrbor, Inc., and the,second man for the Sonoma County
} tme Bennett has cast the Association for the Develop-ment of Bodega Bay, Favored'
'[ one dissenting vote.
the plan.
In its 4-to 1 ruling yester
- Golis said the atomic
.ay, the Commission said power plant would be worth p imply that the. latest petl* $1 million a year in taxes to lon falled to show cause why Sonoma county.
- should reconsider the per.
- .s..,
Sit it has already granted
- acific Gas and Electric Com-any to build the atomic dant.
The Commission previous-
? rejected the association's
' ytitions for reviewing on
-anuary 2 and July 9, and
' n February 13 it turned own a petition for an in-l 2nction.
/
David Pesonen, executive L 'ecretary for the consert'a.
,jonist group, sal'! the Com-sission's latest denial' was
,41 'a, defeat.
i * "It is simply the last ad,
'; ainistrative proc 9 dure we
,sust follow before we take' ie' matt'er'to the Supreme s
, %Nearly 200 persons, mearrl
'ourt," he said.
!*hile, attended an informa ;
lonal hearing on the nuclear ower plant before the Ma.
da
.Jn Board,of Supervisors.
i lBode!a Ilead is in adjoin.'
1n7 ng Sonoma county but a ma.'
. 3rity of the Marin super >
, isors approved the hearing L,
- ,q-
'4
.... JJ,
~~-
. ~~
d 0
(
l
(-
8
)
\\
)
i
.s
.s
.x
' f' [f"& ffnt/D 9I_
' + Ping Pong at the Head C Editor / - Unfortunately the D
. proposed Bodega reactor has be,
)
come a political ping pong ball as ;;
1 partisan groups join their res 4
tive bandwagons, confusing, pec. g _
dis.~g
' forting, and ignoring the basic is :@!
sues which remain:
- 1. What will be the biological.'i e
. 'effect of temperature fluctuation.Tg
{
} and chemical issuance?
I a
k
- 2. How great is the danger of-i i
an atomic reactor located ness' a d I
- known earthquake fault?
,1
- 3. Was the permit legal there was no public hearing?, as']
- 4. Is the plant potentially an
- economic asset er a waste econ.
, omy' ? -
a.or
- 5. Where does one place aes '
r
~ i thetic values...P
~ These issues cannot be 'lcst irt*
"[ political sparring, but must be.de.'*
1cided and shared by all citt ins
,5 and all industry everywhere.
- Redding.
KENN ROB. G L.,. s e
(
...s,C 9
e f
6 l
/
e
.{
+
.. 3 a
._1-. _ _, _ _ _ _,___1
, _. _ _ _. _ _, _ _. 1 __ _ _ _ _ _ _
____._2n____
I
~
~.
i.
t I
1, c
o.a:."dilf $$$M 1733 Water sinw E l cott b o, ca ld g s k 9 9 3 o 3ep w in ^4, tu3 Pr" G(sous7 Saby dadseg A & E lil y y A m d.ss u,n m j-M@)h.
y
,im
<gt%.l(
1 Was%pm,p.c.
Q%lG.f,.X:\\
.e
...3 (5' :.. (Gq., f.4, l
Den on subay :
Q%.g.
\\
v.,.
e l Mye you w ruhn 4+n rk ggapst s('rh
- l PmN Gas & sinrru &nyuay y owiruth sf a risasi-
{
d.its jtynd Bday //d sig.
T (se te n u>q have km 9 'en by t/<o oppmsts sfrkt ensrrac$,ykck.
i A
r/rar l
lsupp+ tan :
- 1) ria ski is a >'staats sanad muw buyart
!!S**t, thtgaQ s/ n>lud n'mtf kW 5tumty by eraymysa caufruaw, z) P Q g rja.g g,digas p a y y,, 0 71,,.
ynsibility of a. catastwPub runteut,saas f
19 heykt risaits erasrk suu,t>oy fa
^
WI of& tfu theiwwat f
Wh, Paut%
f a
w,
&rr: rr~t_- : _'
- _2. 2: :':- r_-:=~ t -__
n _c-e m '
v e-r
--e=
- -+
~~v-~~
q DATE CF 00CUMENT:
DATE RECElYED NO.
l 7.eV A UM'* 81.3 e
Ab# ' 'D E*
% #}
pKJ Q7f.
p c m r.so,.cu ir A s m LTA memos AEPOATs-b iHE gs k
ORIGJ CC:
OTH E R:
% awry (fortsards4 to OR by &msed
^
_x 5 sero *=d-
.%n)
ACTION NECESSARY g
CONCURRENCE O
o^75 Aa**tato' NO ACTION NECESSARY O
COMMEur O
8 v' CLAtstFJ l
Post OFFtCE F6LE CODES MtG. NOs DESCRIPTION (Must Be Unclassified)
REFERRED TO DATE RECElvt0 Sy DATE utr ne af,*,w /ging t!at we turn.irara 1:w rse a 4s for erwt a t odera u to,
'ewards:
940 i
W/E"73% A. 14 ey== i..m ';'a ;1i.
LNCLOSUREss
% 'r;ee s 740 w/ extra.
br 1rEo j
( M n:,u int % 10 w/ss,ta, ;ct kn:c
.3 LEMARKBs M if Di5tr11wtisar 1 - f::.rapi tUe 1 - AIC P;G i
L ~ M.x nks c<,
)
QL*I
@u, s.
..an.m e omca.
u.s. Aroxic zusacy coxxzssioN MAIL CONTRCL FORM ronx are.sses l
4.=-
(8-60) j
.iV,%,,
,w
, c,n.wnw
- mM i
l l
i d
a' d
3
.v
.N L___-__rr_ __ - - : 2 :_ ~ : _ ' = '. * '~:"*~~~*'
~ ~ ~'"~~
'~~~
~
~
.(
OFFId - )F THE CHAIRMAN
=
7
' 7 '
(
T-6 (Date)
TO:
N For Information i
L M or appropriate handling i
For preparation of reply for Chairman's
. signature (Refer to Manual Chapter 0240)
For discussion at Commissioners.' Information Meeting For distribution to other Commissioners Daily Log REMARKS:
i f
a Q /
S 4
mt gr 9.g,8'1
/3
,\\
,[,
2.\\
/f A)~
Howard C. Brown, Jr.
s For the Chairman i
6177
,'4 6
9 4
.1
,.1
-=