COMMENT ⊗   VALID 00002 PAGES
C REC  PAGE   DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002	.require "memo.pub[let,jmc]" source
C00008 ENDMK
C⊗;
.require "memo.pub[let,jmc]" source
.cb SENSE MEETING ON SAVING SUNDESERT


.begin verbatim

Time:	8pm, Tuesday February 28, 1978

Place:	846 Lathrop Drive, Stanford, Calif. (home of John McCarthy), tel: 321-7580

Agenda:	Report from Dr. Edward Teller and discussion of possible actions
.end

	The Stanford chapter of SENSE (Scientists and Engineers for
Nuclear Sources of Energy) was formed with the help of Prof. Hans Bethe
at the time of the campaign against Proposition 15.  It participated
in getting academic opposition to the initiative.  After that
battle was won, Stanford SENSE became dormant.  A few members
organized a small counter-demonstration to last year's demonstration
against the Diablo Canyon plant.

	Now we must revive SENSE in order to try to save the Sundesert
nuclear power plant.  The story is as follows:

	Sundesert is planned by the San Diego Gas and Electric Co. and
is to be located near Blythe, California and would be completed in the
late 1980s.  It has been projected for a long time, but the State
Energy Commission has decided that it comes under the nuclear safety
bills enacted just before Proposition 15 was defeated.  In particular,
after suggesting that Sundesert would be exempt, the Commission
voted 4 to 1 that Sundesert could not be built, because the Federal
Government hasn't demonstrated adequate waste disposal tecnology.

	The State Senate has voted 21-10 to exempt Sundesert from
the requirement, and this is sufficient to pass the bill over Governor
Brown's expected veto.  Now the matter is before the State Assembly,
and the chairman of the relevant committee is Assemblyman Victor
Calvo from this district.  Assemblyman Calvo has been hearing plenty
from Creative Initiative and the other opponents of nuclear energy,
but the scientific and technological community of this area has
been almost silent.

	We have a summary report from the Energy Commission on
alternatives to Sundesert that seems full of wishful thinking about
the increasing use of oil, solar energy, etc.
We also have the American Physical Society report %2Nuclear
Fuel Cycles and Waste Management%1 which concludes that the
remaining uncertainties about the best method of waste disposal
are don't justify a moratorium.  We need to repeat
the conclusions of the APS report loud enough
for the State Assembly to hear.  We also have the excellent
minority report
of Energy Commissioner Alan Pasternak summarizing why Sundesert
is needed.

	We hope that all who took part or hoped
to take part in the campaign against Proposition 15 will come
to the meeting.  Possible
actions include: getting more signatures on
Tom Connolly's statement, holding a press conference, meeting
with Assemblyman Calvo, making a lobbying trip to Sacramento,
and preparing analyses of the relevant Energy Commission documents.

	Enclosed with this announcement is a copy of a statement
supporting Sundesert prepared by Professor Thomas Connolly and aimed
at the Assembly.  If he may use your name,
please tell him at 497-4021 or 321-2442 or write him at the
Mechanical Engineering Department, Stanford.

	Please try to get others to assent to the statement and come
to the meeting.