ML18192A791
| ML18192A791 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 12/26/1975 |
| From: | Cardamone C - No Known Affiliation |
| To: | Clark H Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| Download: ML18192A791 (5) | |
Text
I
~
~
1ltl 5 N. Third Ave.
Tilcson Ai'izona 857O5
. Doceber ?6; 1975 S
t~r. IIugh K. Clark P.O.
Box 127A Konnodyvillo, I<arylan<t 2161<5 In t ho
!~a t, t.<.r o f Ari.zo.ia Pub I i c Service Company,,o L;i1.
(I'alo
<ior<i<! Ilucloar Ge or:<ting St.ation,'niLs I, 2 and 5)
Dock o t. llO'T'I 4<'>0-'52
'pO-5".9 ',%
!)TI] ">0-') >0
Dear Nr. Clark:
Pzi.or to the lett:er I sent you dated December 8,1975 in forming you that I had consoli.dated wi th AC<".C I discussed my pl.ans with Tres
<",nglish.
I would like to rem'ind all parties concerned that I consolidat:ed wi.th AC<<C before they wi.L'hdrow as an. intervenor.
Si'nce l'onsolid-ated wit:h ACF:C and they subsoquently'. withdr ew from.the'roceeding, the 'only way that this action can'e inter preted is that there is no l.ongor, n i.nt:ervenor.
I wil'l:iot seek to bo reinstated as an intervenor.
Sincerely,
~
~
~
CI
~a'i Ca rmi n C;irda.",on e J r.
cc:
.".<. IIugh K. Clark l)r. Kenno th A. !'.cCol Lo.<
Dr. ')uen Lin J.
S toboi
. Arthur C. Gehr, Bruce 4!nrton,
<".sq.
- Ir. Tros F..n<. lish Andrew '<'.
Bet twy, I.".r;q.
~
Arizona Clean I nor gy Coali tion Atonic Sat'ety and I,i.censing Board I'anol, Atomic Sa feLy and I,t censing AI'>p<.'al Board I!anol Docket.i.ng and Servic<.
Sec t.ion Mike <<'.~
<<@+I 1 0 J <ii< <<ii'(Q e
~W
~
~ ~O a<n< <
~.'
~~ 5 e~Q f4 gV I' ~ a M
Joplin p Qgg Q Jr.
'l
'EIugh I'. Cla k Chairman HRC Hearing 3oard PO Box 1?7A Kennedyville I(d 21645
Dear lir Cla k:
poc~ttto MfNRg JAN 9 197.6 Qgc~ 4 64 54cfl~.
yg~egtey 4 ~
Q7 IIOCKEl hU!NER RROD.GIGI1.
F
- ~@ ~~~, >9~
December 19,1 5
8 I wish to n orm you tha.
.he Arizona Cle n Hne gy Coali.ion is withdrawing as the intervenor ".. the construction permit hearings for the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating S.ation.
'de a
e doing so for two basic reasons.
The irst is simply a 1 ck of funds.
';ie do not feel.hat our chances ir. the hearings justi y our raising several
.housand dollars for witnesses and other expenses.
The second reason is far mo e important, however.
I would
'e worth the e fort to raise the money if we el.
we had a chanc
'I a
a fair hearing, but we can'".
ight both the app" icants and the NHC staff a, the sang time.
Virtually eve y c" im bv.he applicant abou.
the coo. and need fo" Palo Verde is contrary to present local and na.ional trends and cont arv to national projections, yet apparently all wore accepted by staf
~.ithout any question during he en ire hearing p. ocess.
The nationa" p ojections for the cos of building a nuclear power plant have escalated about'1/3 pcr year o
the. last six I
years.
(See A +ached)
Staff has accepted the applican s'stim te of 7~~ per year.
Present in.crest =ates for long term bonds'are 10.5!~ and higher.
Staff'as accep.ed 8 '.
At the applicants'rojec.ed construe+ion cos.s
.his amounts to an additional S1.7 billion in interest on a 25-ye..r bond.
Uranium has.rip'd in price in the last 2 years and is expec.ed to'ouble again wi.hin a decade.
(nuclear
.'xchange Corp.)
$festinghouse, the supplier under contract, would have to accept almost a 1/2 billion dollar loss by 1990 for A"HAPP to get fuel at the 822/1b tney project.
Though,it is more difficult to prove, the projected need for the'plant seems to be just as ar from cali.y as the projected
'ost;
."'or at least a decade bef'ore the Arab oil boycott, the real cost of electricity (in current dollars) dropped apidly in 'both the app'cants'ervice a eas and in the nation as a whole.
At
'the same tine the economy was booming and most people were completely unzip e of the impending energy sho.tages.
Since the Arab oil boycott,'hese'rends have, ra.her emphatically, been r versed and a
e expected to remain that way for the forse able future.
Based on '.hese facts, one would expect the projec.ions o
need listed in.he 'iM ".inal '"nvironmental Statement to be dif trent rom tnose of
.?.e Draft ZS since the DZS used projoc+ions based on pre-'ooyco
, data.
They are.
They'e higher.
In fact,
.he projected grow.h rate in electrica3.
consumption for 1976 over 197'j is highe" -!.an any growth ate any of the applicants has.ever experienced in the'ntire h'story.
This p ojection follows.he fi s. d ops 'n lectrical conoum~tion any of he app3.ic"nts has eve ezpe ienced 'n.hei enti e his.ory.
I asked oe o the members. of the legal staff to chec?:
and find ou+ if the tee<>nical staff h d ever cues
. oned
.he applicants
)$
on this.
He check and said.ha.
<<ie (i<<RU staf
) "haven'. done too much
.~o=l on that column."
"That column" is the basic justific"'tio
. for even considering building a power plant in the fi.st place.
Tike other.intervenors around
.he country, we reoues'ted funds from the hRC to he3.p us @resent
-.he po'nt of view o peoplo who stand to,lo e i= these plants are 'ouilt.
Por all pract'c 1
purposes. we,,lilce all the othe.s, were e used.
ihe prospect that (i.
.he
?<<RC rules favorably on the basic
.issue) the Board might (a ter
.he he. r'ngs a
e over) grant us (after the hearings are over) an-indetermina.e fraction o= our expenses,is simply not good enough.
Public interest groups like ourselves, th t ope tp on voluntee time from volunteer
- people, can't survive on maybes.
A part time ooard cannot be ezpected
.o bear the full load of protoctine the public. If the inte~onors can"~ and the staf n.
won'0 that only leaves the applican s who stand o
malice seve al billion dollars net pro-it -rom tnese plant...
Until some very basic changes, are
- maLe, the public will not be protected.
Sincerely you s,
~
gp'c Tres -ng ish Ari"ona Clean Ene gy Coali.ion
ESTll~iATi'D COSTS FOR &CLEAR PO'i'h:"lR
~ (Sou. ce:
USA "C ';iViD1!-lr~q5, Power Plan~ Caoital Costa, Oc.. l97r)
DOChET. t(UVi3Eg BIOD. f llIlliFhO.R ASj+8+
VOO 600 500
. 400
~g JJ 4'
I i C) 500 200 l00 0
68 70 Y=;iR 72