COMMENT ⊗   VALID 00002 PAGES
C REC  PAGE   DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002	.require "let.pub" source
C00005 ENDMK
C⊗;
.require "let.pub" source
∂SEN Assemblyman Victor Calvo↓State Capitol↓Sacramento, CA∞
Dear Mr. Calvo:

	Thank you for the opportunity to testify at the Assembly
hearing on the alternatives to Sundesert.  After thinking about
the hearing, I have one more thought.

	The substantive issue before the Legislature is whether
there are uncertainties about nuclear waste disposal that justify
a moratorium.  The precise meaning of "demonstrated" is less
important, since the Legislature that wrote "demonstrated"
into the law can decide how to interpret it.

	There have been many studies on waste disposal, but the
most authoritative and unbiased is the recent study by the American
Physical Society.  The president of the society was careful to
be sure that its membership included neither representatives of
the nuclear industry nor anti-nuclear intervenors, and a high
level committee of the society reviewed the study for possible
biases before it was released.
In fact, no-one has accused the study members of bias, although
Dr. Gene Rochlin of Berkeley, a
member of the study, pointed out that the study did not address the question
of whether a method had been "demonstrated".

	As you know, the conclusion of the study was that the
remaining uncertainties did not justify a moratorium.

	As it happens, Professor Panofsky of the Stanford Linear
Accelerator Center was president of the Society when the study
was initiated, and Dr. George Pake of the Xerox Palo Alto Research
Center is the present president of the Society.

	Professor Panofsky is agreeable to discussing the procedures taken
to assure an unbiased study either by telephone or in person here in Palo
Alto.  Unfortunately, he is so overloaded with work that I was unable to
persuade him to volunteer to testify in Sacramento.

	Dr. Pake is also available to discuss the results of the
study.

.sgn