ML20238D371
| ML20238D371 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 06/16/1987 |
| From: | White I AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| To: | |
| References | |
| OLA, NUDOCS 8709110137 | |
| Download: ML20238D371 (2) | |
Text
.,k,&r i
June: 16, 19?7 3
Office of the Secretary
'87 JUL 10 P3 :11 U.S.N.R.C.
Docketing & Service Division Washington, D.C. 20555 M
y Re:
Docket Nos. 50-275-OLA
/
and 50-323-OLA
Dear Mr. Secretary:
The purposerf this letter is to voice my vehement disapproval of storin" ANY more radioactive waste in the existing racks at the Dinblo Canyon Nuclear Plant, and also my disapproval of the lacl; of information made available to the public about it.
The Federal Waste Policy Act, I understand, stipulates that any re-racking amendments must be compatible with public opinion (those may not be the exact words).
But it is very difficult to form an opinion when the facts are so little know by.the-public, because such information and facts are not made readily-available to the public.
I know this much.
It makes no sense to the local residents to increase existing potential dangers that are already at a high level in a nuclear plant located in an area of acknowledged seismic activity.
Therefore, I am asking that more information be given to the public.
Until then PG&E should not be allowed to proceed with any increase and/or re-racking in the storage of radioactive j
waste at Diablo Canyon until the peopI'e have been H0tESTLY and COMPLETELY informed and afterwards have given their approval of it.
Otherwise it would seem that the Federal Waste Policy Act is being violated.
I realize you have public hearings, but very few people can attend those meetings, which are not very widely l
l publicized, to say the least!
It really doesn t seem to be un-reasonabletometosuggestthatPG&Esendoutgoallresidents
]
l in the immediate area some kind of b'roBhure with honest and l
straight-forward information in laymen's tees,"what. tNy are. j i
~
i planning to do and why.
They spend,g or. at least. they 'are ~ "~ '
planning to spend untold millions and.-mayl;teJbill.i.ons,_of_dollarg, so one mailing should not be prohibitive in cost by comparison.
I f
8709110137 370616 POR ADOCK 05000275 T
PDR; m
A
-s t.-, " '
Dybe, as ve.have learned in previous cases, they don't WAUT the public to be honestly and completely informed.
lherefore, the
" bottom line" of my opinion, based on very scanty information, is this:
ho increase in storage and/or re-racking of radioactive waste at Diablo Canyon Nuclear Plant should be nermitted...... PERIOD.
Sincerely, bht.uL L
Irene White i
772 Shamrock Lane i
Pismo Beach, CA 93449 l
l M
\\
I M
e t i..
j, l
1 1'
1:
l l
o ----- -- ---
o