ML19343B785
| ML19343B785 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 12/22/1980 |
| From: | Pollock M LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO. |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| SNRC-523, NUDOCS 8012300479 | |
| Download: ML19343B785 (3) | |
Text
...
,n.
i
f4(@
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY
,, m eM J.Ae/45/4Atf
- m ;--a 175 EAST OLD COU NTRY ROAO
- H 4C K SVI L LE, NEW YORK 11801 u1LJRD S POLLOCm VeCE DRE S CEaeT-PeyCLE AR SNRC-523 December 22, 1980 i
l Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director l
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission j
Washington, D. C.
20555 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION - UNIT 1 COCKET NO. 50-322
Dear Mr. Denton:
We certainly appreciated the opportunity -to talk with you on December 16th about LILCO's nuclear program.
The meeting was particularly useful for me in my new role at the Company.
Since returning to Long Island, we have received a copy of Chairman Ahearne's first monthly status report to the -
Bev111 Subcommittee, dated November 21, 1980 _ The report's
(
treatment of Shoreham came as quite a shock.
It proj ects the following dates:
Shoreham SER 6/81 ACRS 7/81 SER Supplement 9/81 Hearing Start 11/81 Hearing Completion 3/82 ASLB Decision 6/82 OL Issuance 9/82 As you know, your Staff had scheduled December,.1980 as l
the date for issuing a Shoreham SER.
The document.has been under -
l preparatio
?iterally for years -- the first of many such Staff I
schedules 1.
'ts appearance was March, 1977.
Accordir. gly, we were dismayet to read in the Bev111 report that the SER appears to have sudderdy slipped six more months, from December,1980 to June, 1981.
It is difficult to understand why.
Even TMI, which prevented what then seemed to be almost certain issuance of the SER in spring 1979, is now 20 months past.
go \\ 1 9 O t
1 8 012200$f
. ~.
h f
Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Cecember 22, 1980 Page Two We were also surprised to see the Bevill report's suggestien that hearings for Shoreham would run only from November, 1981 to March, 1982.
First, those particular months include a lot of unavoidable holidays.
Second, the most.
important, past experience precludes planning for the Shoreham hearings on the assumption that they will move so briskly.
Shoreham's OL proceeding has been moving along already for almost five' years.
It involves several well funded parties l
who are hostile to the plant, represented by effective counsel and technically assisted by MEB, Inc. and ERG.
Immense effort i
has gone, and continues to go, into discovery, negotiation, stipulation, and summary disposition.
As a result, there are i
fewer contentions still to be litigated than would otilerwise have been the case, and those that remain after going through the discovery process are better particularised than usual.
But when all is said and done, there will still be numerous difficult
{
issues that can be resolved only after: bitterly contested l
he arin gs.
1 Irrespective of what may be true in most other parts of-the country, it is crucial to recognize that nuclear hearings on t
Lcng Island take time.
The AEC hearings en Shoreham's CP dragged j
on for 70 days over a 2-1/2-year period, and a companion New York State proceeding lasted 21 days in 1971-72.
The NRC's evidentiary sessions on Jamesport's CP covered 44 days over a ten month period in 1976-77, while the companion New York-State I
proceeding ran~ for 123 days from October,1974 to September, 1977.
7 i
There is reason to believe that the Shoreham OL hearings may move more quickly than. past nucles.r sessions on Long Island.
But in light of past experience. it would be unwise to assume for planning purposes that the hearings will, in fact, move more
}
quickly.
Thus, we strongly urge that the Staff not assume that j
the Shoreham SER can be safely delayed to June, 1981 in reliance on quick hearings in late 1981-early 1982.
No sound basis exists
~
i for any such assumption.
The SER is needed now if all concerned are to have a reasonable chance to finish the OL proceeding ~more or less by the time Shoreham is ready to load fuel.
In this regard, it really does matter that Shorehan's licensing not lag behind its construction.- Seven years after.the o
l 1973 Arab oil embargo, LILCO's generating capacity remains totally -
oil-fired; the Company continues to. produce baseload as well as-intermediate and peaking power with oil.
And of that oil, well j
over 90% is imported.
As a result, LILCO's system is still exposed to the whims of international oil politics.
The.U. S. balance of payments is worsened by the millions of dollars that the Ccmpany-sends annually to foreign oil -suppliers.
And LILCO's customers -
must pay for very expensive oil-fired electricity.
I i
,, _, ~,,... - - _,.., _.
j l
Mr. Harold R.
Denton, Director Zecember 22, 1980 Page Three When the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station is physically and legally ready to operate, the situaticn will materially improve.
Shoreham's 820 megawat ts will displace 8,000,000 barrels of oil each year, saving over $280,000,000 in fuel costs annually at today's prices.
As is obvious from my comments so far, LILCO is increas-ingly concerned that the plant will be physically ready to load fuel before the conclusion of its Operating License proceeding.
When that proceeding does ultimately find that the plant meets all relevant requirements, as we believe it will, then pointless harm will have been done to national energy policy and to LILCO's customers if the plant has been kept off line simply because a licensing proceeding begun in March,1976 has yet to find its way to a conclusion.
An SER for Shoreham is essential to getting on with the plant's licensing.
The Agency, LILCO, and the public would all bene fit from the document's immediate appearance.
Until it final decisions cannot begin to be made about whether
- appears, Shoreham is compatible with the public health and safety, and thus whether it should be alicwed to operate once physically ready.
We very much hope that the Bev111 report is not indicative of your true priority for Shoreham.
We also very much hope that you will take a personal interest in the Shoreham SER and encourage few your Staff to complete and issue the document within the next weeks.
If further meetings with LILCO seem useful to you, in under-standing our concerns, we will be there at your convenience.
Very truly yours,
l Y
td f
-?b$
Millard S. Pollock Vice President-Nuclear cc:
Honorable Norman F. Lent