ML20235A095
Text
o
/O O
@!w%b
], IA-tWA Joe Feuchard, IIeens Servise Breneh September {6,p1964
,g m
oivi.i..f,e611 1afer.eu, m
->~~ 4.q Aedney L. Southwick. Assistaat to the -
)
- 2' Manager for Feblic Inferisation, SAN PEsciEN LETTER TO JCAE f
U fV rl,,i.e fC'QCS Attached is the most recent letter frena Pesomes to the JCAE relating to sedega and 5. J. Res.167, and a copy of a pesblia release on the subject which uma insed briefly in this ausraims's Chrosicle (alip forwarded te IIndia seeserek for Meademorters' distributes).
Att.achsenta:
- 1. NCAPEM6e release 9/16/64
- 2. Pesenen Itr to Coeuoy,in, 9/16/64 9/14/64
- 3. Olip, News Call Bullet ces Eerold Price, REG, MQ, w/ attacks.
Robert lesenstein, 250, BQ, w/a Richard Dean,_ REG,_MQ, w/attachs.j i
i R. W. Smith, Comp 1. Y., Sea, w/aqL i l
Y t
CJ i
n i
v3
~
,.,il 1
i F1 SOUTHWICE:st 9/16/64 8709230206 851217;-
i.'
j
(
NORTHEFl! CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION TO PRESERVE BODEGA HEAD AND HARBOR, INC.
2820 Telegraph Avenue Berkeley 5, California i
PBESE RELEASE: For Release Tel: Prospect 5-2970 (David Pesonen)
Wednesday, September 16, 1964 BODFC A PLANT THREATENS ATOMIC POWER PRCOBAA San Francisco (Sept.16)--If the Atomic Energy Commission approves the Pacific Gas and Electric Company's proposed atomic power plant at Bodega Bay, it could irreparably darrage the progress of nuclear power in California. This warning was contained in a letter to the
\\
i Joint Congressional Atomic Energy Ccemittee, released today by the Northern California
]
Association to Preserve Bodega Head and Harbor.
Development of nuclear power, such as envisioned in the California Water Plan, will require "a reservoir of public confidence," the letter stated. And the presence of an earthquake fault through the Bodega site makes it impossible to have confidence in any nuclear plant located there--because of the " unique hazards" and the " exotic design scheme" proposed by FC&E engineers to cope with them.
(Last December the U.S. Geslogical Survey repcrted an "important zone of weakness" through the reactor site.
Last March PG&E proposed a " floating design" to withstand violent shaking from the nearby San Andreas Fault while sir
.neously riding over slip-t hrcugh the plant 's foundations on a layer of specially graded sand. )
page "PG&E has consistently misconstrued the issue as nuclear vs. non-nuclear power,"
l and David Pesonen, Executive Secretary of the Bodega association and author of the letter.
I "But the real issue is safe vs. reckless development of this new energy source "
He noted that the utility "has insisted also that the plant would be perfectly safe, j
vh;le frantically submitting new designs for the AEC's approval. The latest scheme is so far out that it has never been attempted for any building anywhere, mich less an atomic l
reactor.
If the AEC OK's this one," Pesonen said, "it will mean only one thing:
that they este more about building reactors than defending public safety.
And the public confidence in their expertise, necessary for sound development, vill be hard to restore."
l
-end-
l
/
\\
\\
g Northern California Accociation To Preserve Bodega Head and Harbor 2820 Telegraph Avenue Berkeley 5, California
]
Aovisoes September 14, 1964 Ansel Adoms David Brower i
Joha Emmaas Mr. John T. Conway, Executive Director Harold Gilhom' Joint Coc:mittee on Atomic Snergy Joel ow.,ov.on Congress of the United States Waahinl; ton, D.C., 20510 weidon P, Hooid Joel Hedgpeth
Dear Mr. Conva e:
Francis Herrmg
- o. e. tutea This is in response to the letter of August 27 from Mr. Harold Wdhom Penn Wn, Jr.
L. Price, Director of Regulation for the Atomic Energy Cornission, Thomo. Park.n.on commenting on my letter to you of July 31. We vould like to esphasiate that we appreciate the thorough and prompt attention you have paid g
,,,,,,,,,3 to this matter and we respect Mr. Price's official position as spokes-q
,,,,;,,,,,,ig, ma for the AEC.
{
- o. a t.Pe.onen
]
necum secretary However, Mr. Price's letter is not particularly responsive to the
-l W
issues raised in our letter of July 31.
. e did not question the 1
precedent for " secret" meetings between the applicant and the ACRS,
J and the AEC. But we did point out that the procedure in no way can be considered judicial or quasi-judicial.
l The record developed at hearings before the Atomic Safety and Licensin,; Board, to which Mr. Price refers, must necessarily stem from the existing docket, including amendments to the Pacific Gas and Electric Company application developed throdgh discussion at these meetings. Ameninent No. 7to the company's preliminary hazards analysis, dated March 31, 1964, e= bodies what Mr. - Price describes as a "signifi-cant chan;e in the seismic desi n" of the reactor. We understand on 6
good authority that this design concept was suggested to the company by the AEC's own consultant, Dr. Nathan M. Newmark, retained by the Co: mission's staff ;o review the company's application. Thus, to pursue the parallel with judicial procedure, we have here an agent for the judje acting as counsel for the applicant. This procedure must be viewed as more quasi than judicial and should not be used to argue against legislative action on.S. J. Res. 167 Secondly, Mr. Price offers no explanation for exclusion of the l
U.S. Geolo3 cal Survey personnel from the meeting of the ACRS subcom-i mittee at Bode;a Bay on June 3 Geology is a field discipline and i
the issue of safety at the Bodega site now seems to turn on interpre-1 tation of field evidence of a fault through the reactor site. PG&S i
consultants--who did accompany the subcommittee--contend that the fault is a " minor offset." The U.S. Geological Survey report of December 1963, on the other hand, describes this fault as "an important zone of weakness." It is difficult to see how the subcommittee could
(
receive the full benefit of its visit to the site, accompanied by spokesmen for only one of these two opposir-3 points of view.
Purpotei to work for preservation of tbo scenic and h< stone headlonds of Bodego Boy and to insure the occiog. col in*er 9 of the surrounding marine environment.
A Cahlorrua Non prollt Corporation
l l
- 'Gonvay, JCAd--9/1hj6h
(
-2
(
' Finally, Mr. Price implies that the public attention paid to this project has j
had no influence on the abruptly broadened scope of examination by the ACRS and the
)
Commission's regulatory staff. The first introduction of the U.S. Geological Survey l
into the Bodega matter came as an attachment'to a letter of May 20, 1963, from Secretary Udall to Chairman Seaborg. The attachment contains a preliminary assessment of the. geology and seismology of Dodega Head, and, significantly, relies heavily on findings by Dr. Pierre St.-Amand, a consultant retained by our citizens' Association.
-l Nore comprehensive findings by Dr. St.-Amand are again cited for authority in.the U.S, Geological Survey's report on seismology of the site in September 1963. In light of this and the subsequent U.S.G.S. report which generated major design changes by
^
)
the company, we can reasonably infer that public participation has had a tangible effect on the technical evaluation of the Bodega site.
i It is interesting to note, in view of later developments, that the Secretary of the Interior's letter of May 20, 1963, appears to take for granted that disedvery of a fault through the reactor site would almost automatically result in denial of PG&E's l
application.' The U.S.G.S. attachment rightly places great emphasis on the statement by It&E consulta'nt Dr. George W. Housner, that "it is quite impossible to design a power plant to survive without damage the large permanent ground surface displacements that might occur if the earthquake fault slippage occurred on'the site."
Since the date of the Secretary's leter, the U.S.G.S. has confirmed the possibility of fault displacement at the site. This possibility was nedepted by the company to the extent that it has submitted two major design changes--Amandments Nos. 7 and 8--in'an attempt to compensate for fault movement that the company's own consultant stated could not be compensated for. Tnese designs are only theoretical, having virtually no basis.
in operating experience--a fact which is hardly calculated to instill public confidence.
That public attention is varranted in these proceedings is further indicated by a comparison of the Bodega expe.-lence with the history of PG&2's application for the Humboldt Bay reactor, as reviewed in the enclosed article from Nuclear Safety, June 1960..This publication, prepared by the AEC staff at Oak Ridge, has an unblemished record for objectivity. The writer finds that out of 19 reactor license applications reviewed, major amb1 uities exist in the record of only one application--PG&E's at B
Humboldt Bay. The writer finds substantial technical grounds for concern over the safety of the Humboldt Bay installation. For a number of reasons, including a deceptive public relations campaign by the company, the Humboldt Bay installation faced no significant public scrutiny. In view of this company's record with its a
first and only other nuclear installation, vc consider that comparable ambiguities j
--affectin5 the public safety of the San Francisco Bay Area--very likely would remain in the' record of the Bodega application were it not for public participation early in the licensing procedure.
l J
As conservationists we are anxious to support the proper development of nuclear power in California, to insure unpolluted air, to conserve water, and to conserve energy. But nuclear power development requires a reservoir of public confidence in the reactor developer and in the ASC's regulatory procedures. Whether or not this confidence can be assured depends entirely on experience with the first large reactors.
The Humboldt experience, though with a relatively small reactor, is not encouraging.
Bodega is the State's first large power reactor--although other applications in Sothern California for comparable plants have since progressed further. Public opinion recognizes the unique hazards posed by the Bodega site and by the exotic design scheme devised to cope with them. Therefore, approval of the Bodega installation would irreparably damage the public confidence so crucial to sound development of the peaceful atom in California.
Sincerely, Kn:1:
cc:
Mr. Harold L. Price David E. Pesonen Executive Secretary
a
" l i.' C- = w C I'. E
$.~
8-Y q
~.3 3 ? =s
~
t-d s
.g e
xE
- to j
-e hy7 6 h 2C h}
-l; ;
E 1,, 7. 6 4
=.
6 a ::
-d
- a w y c A
o 9
9 : -
6 c s
r v ; c.sCey$--
4a s
=x m e.
sy-v c c
.k. *. s -
6.
a y. t
=*
I Le
=r= 2
.- Pyh k
b*
V,, )
l 2* w
- z v
s'= y *- =
2 u: LI :
m x..*
. z se
-., f bh dM E
E g 3
- E
,"t
= =. :. O i
- c*
r
. = -
- s
. * - ~ _
~ }.. "' *: } ""
2 *h E
<g
- 2,.
C.?.,: - ?
.n. %
-. 2 es.-.
-..i
-A 5 c:
L 3 k 5-N,.*
2 T d.'
2 s
- :c -
f,.
.- R
.3
,- 5.-
- T E },
e.
5.M so **
b s
Ir I5*
-S W { Ze 7
- l W
,.t I
s =. 2. i,.L - s5: 2 ~ > *
.r.
a 4
-,,,.- = %
s a * :,.. :
,., 2.
f_ *=
.P
- '".-*7
,* C 4
-i
~ :; r. : : : I 2 :.by s.
1
- - a
.. - - 1 1.: = 1:
r'~
".: s.i :
F
. J.: -' /
J
- . : E
=_.f g
- t -.:
O
- 3 3'
'/
7 /
~
- >, - - 5
." ', = 3 3'
.?
?(
s e
g
- n. 2 : ? ; '.~.2 S :
z.
- i
- - M F -
- ?
I 'l.."
.1
- 2. =- ':,.
f
^ :
,.i r.s a
1 T, " g, ~
t-j
,,,,.(.W=F T :
M f,
=
e f=
i*T
/
3
- : - L. h$g * $ f :L E (i.
..r
=.*-d :. * *d7-E E
hI-5F
.h. T y : ~.:
I I
l
=
.s
.. a -.
-.=
1,,=..- s3
- =2
- .E.s s
E
- 5 h 9.-.~- =., :-
^*, 7 hm
~:e 1 J h n 12.
..h
.C. g f3R 2 *? j k
- * * ~. :-
~ ',. E=c=.2. i kan 7
r.
- a
- Y
.n s
'-U7
~ [ /h
,4 7 l
E>
r : i
- C
=i
.m 2~
/'
.,4* * * *. ". _ = =
e w
=-
A d
'" T J M. v". * : :
O r.
8" hy-t f.
Y a
3 1 -
(,y C -,
p
-.
- _ =
F -h 't.I h., TEf
$F{
b r
a o
4 V - ~ A.3 T I Q
.l 3. :.
~ = li T
M, I
- 4 b w
cm
- ?:
- -=: ; ;
I ~
h $ $ f i f f f ;-
.i
~ i l-i - l._f I
i
- U * * !
r.
~
s
.. k. V.
- l
.~i~hs S,. 5 _, Y i {
t f
33D:
r.
-p f
T N 5h, f
f
- .
- --. y. : - :-
1
_ _fz: E *
- f,.
5 !
4/*
-5E AW l*
- h5-
- n s.z.
- 3 i
e-.. ~5 2, * -
- 1.
- 5
- 5 ~C = = f
=-v,*-
~i m
' f8. i
...fli:
T-[*
. ~ ;-
- _ut m
g.-
5-i,..
.l td-
. - ' ~.
j=n
-a; r
- 7
~ +:.
r-.
+
\\
- e.T
^ * ',
, 1 97-
. T.
, ?
$.5 [ E.
4 e
+
a 9
l j}' l h
(
0'21
'lV l
w b
c v,b
[
i l
B W
g
'k SIERRA CLUBc wits Tower, San Francisco 4 i l1
~ p..
.3, August 26,1964 by Ansel Adams in rhis h the Amerian.E.u 8 C - 2. O _5~. 3 y The President J
The White House
/
i Washington, D. C.
Dear Mr. President:
1 Our purpose here is to ask favorable attention for the request from i
3 Mr. Tom B. Carvey, President of the California Democratic Cou g
1964, urging "your direct intervention into the matter of the proposed nuclear power plant at Bodego Head in Northern California, to the end that your review will clearly 4 ' f 7,
i show that further construction is not in the public interest and should be suspended."
Mr. Carvey invokes the voice of "some 70,000 working Democratic volunteers in California" in support of his request. We wish to add the voice of this 26,000 member organization, which often has articulated an increasing concern among Americans with the deterioration of our physical environment as well as the disappearance of scenic resources.
The Sierra Club has possed formal resolutions opposing the proposed Pacific
\\ occasions: August 5,1958; May 5,1961; and June 9,1963.
Gas and Electric Company nuclear power plant on Bodega Head on three separate l
The Sierra Club is also on record favoring the early development of economic l
nuclear power. The prospect of substitution of this energy source for hydroelectric energy is of special interest, in view of the great and irretrievable domoge that would be imposed on scenic resources by most of the hydro developments now being proposed.
We find no inconsistency,however, between this position and our strong opposition to the construction of a powe r plant on Bodega Head. Indeed, the enormous q
public apprehension over the proximity of the Bodego Head site to the active San Andreas i
Fault and the possibility of an active earthquake fault through the foundations of the I
proposed site may jeopardize the entire nuclear power program in California. The Sierra Club, I would stress, is not expert on matters of nuclear safety. But our members i
shore the public concern, I am sure, arising from the repeated redesigning of the in-stallation after insistent reassurances that each preceding design was quite safe. We Rec'd Off. Or. uf %;.
i Lbte_ /.C : !7: kE l
Tim...<2 2/2------
l Beth._.. _. C __-. _ -
02.1 l
j
(
0 2.'
t i
The President August 26,1964 l
believe that it was conservationist pressure, following a brood-scoped analysis in the public interest, that broke the complacency and brought about the redesign. More powerful investigative forces than any yet brought to bear are necessory to show that still further redesign is not needed.
4 Our concern is primarily for the beauty of the face of Americo and what this will mean to the process of living in this land in this generation as well as future generations. I myself believe that there has been a cynical defiance of the public Interest at Bodega that has imperiled not only a fine potential park, but also the orderly and considerate development, mindful of all public values, of nuclear energy so badly -
'i needed in our future.. It seems likely, for example, that the opposition which hos developed to other nuclear power proposals in Southern California might never have occurred had it not been for the precedent of public opposition on the unique issues of Bodega Head.
Therefore, we endorse Mr. Corvey's request not only on behalf of wise use of a unique natural feature on the California coast, but inferentially on behalf of rapid development of safe nuclear power, and wise use of our remaining natural rivers.
i Sincerely, l
.I David Brower Executive Director i
i 021
. e,
'J i,
[
i For action, For concurrence.
~ * ** a oout ta'5-For tiesture.
For Infortnation.
MEMO ROUTE SUP f
l Note and return.
Minn AEC-93 IRev. Nisy H. MD REM ARM S INf TIALS te thJditorm To (Nam. and unft)
-Attached La-clip - letter:
j Joe Fouchard, DPI..HQ from Santa Rosa Press Democrat "A-Flant j
jRarold Price, REG, HQ Attacke ilssesponsible'".
- ^ ' '
[
O ~$ 0 INITI ALS
\\
NEMARKS
.-.TO (Name and v6:0
.\\
,/
Robert Lowenstein, REC, HQ
'w dA.,/
oArc
/
/
- t. L. Doan, REG, MQ RLMARKS IN( f t ALS TO (Name and unit)
R. W. Smith, Comp 1. V., SAN y-M7t t
f @-
/[,n
^
l
{'
ggg;--Dk._d Reg.
l REMARKS F ROM (Narne and unit)
)
Rodney L. Southwick
/
((
V _-
Assistant to the Mana i;er
.qj j
-- la
- qj_
r, for Public Information rSANm q -
}-ju, TiJie. -
x%
y
_ _ ggLy._
p DATE PHONE NO.
979/64 U 5 GOHANWDT PRIhttM 7FQ m1 -@422 L5E Of MER SiOE FOR ADDITIOhAL REMARKS
i
(
f s
l Santa Rosa b d.4M
( V A Plant Attacks
' Irresponsible' EDITOR: S umbling mer each other in eagerness to bring accusations. cnarges, l
law suit and retrospection, cems to condernn a nudear energy plant at Bddega Head seem to fester, desutute of worth.
Instant seismic experts do not condemn or agitate against a similar plant in the Tchach-mountains, to be operated apt and supply energy for pump-ing water by the State.
Why should Sonoma County i
be denied progress in the use I
of modern discoveries in the j
production of electric energy?
(
If nuclear energy is the means of producing electric power i
at less cost for the State to f
l pump water, would it not be less expensive for our ranch-ers to do the same thing, not l
ta mention benefits for light-l ing our cities and other uses by residents of Senoma County.
Research wi!! show,. prior l
to time when Russia let go with her gigantic atomic bomb f
due predictions were made l
as to how devilish radioacti.
sitv would rear its invisible head and fill our field's gras-
[!
ses with contamination. In l
turn the grass would contami-f nate the cow, the cow would i
contaminate the milk, the milk would contaminate w e-uns' and just about now we should be looking out from the win' I
dows of tha' well known town.
There is no basis of fact l
that the State Division of Beaches and Parks are in-fluenced by any person or group d persons --There is no basis of fact that the Atomic Energy Commission is influenced by any person or group of persons.-There r,
no basis of fact that any ambulance w h ie h cuoveycd any person injured or ki: led in-i j
an nuclear energy plant un l
destroyed by fire or in any other manner.
Ilow naive ate residents cf
?>
h.
I Sonoma County supposed to be that it is assumed they t-unuld a e c e p t trresponcih!?
~Z statements which have been foisted upon "let The Pubhc s
Speak" column.
There was a time when the N
delicious tomato was known as the " lave Appie" and
'3 considered poisonc33 by those not aware it was edible. Let us not be bambooded by
-2 osa
- - - - _ - -