ML20010B483
| ML20010B483 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Bailly |
| Issue date: | 08/05/1981 |
| From: | Tedesco R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Moody P AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20010B484 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8108170060 | |
| Download: ML20010B483 (6) | |
Text
A.
L--
w y
5-
"u y
y f,g g'
AUG 5 1981 Cocket No. 50-367 lirs. Pat Moody 416 So. 17th Street Chesterton, Indiana 46304 Dear Mrs. Hoody.
Your letter dated May 12, 1981, regarding your views on the Bailly Generating Station, Nuclear 1 (Bailly) has been forwarded to my office for a reply. In your letter, you voice strong opposition to the Bailly facility based on a number of concerns. You also provide a copy of your paper from an environ-mental policy class and some newspaper clippings.
I assume that the newspaper clippings and your class paper were meant only as background material to support your views. Accordingly, I am not responding to the attachments but rather, am limiting my response solely to the comments in your letter.
I believe your individual views can be suimarized into three broad categories:
(1) public health and safety; (2) alternate energy sources; and (3) the pollution t.nat may come from the introduction of advanced technology.
I shall briefly address myself to these three subjects.
I agree with you that NIPSCO and all other corpo ate entities doing business in your conaunity should work "... to t e life safer, secure for their customers..."
With
/
respect to the Bailly facility, ilIPSCO has the burden of demonstrating that the facility can be operated with reasonable assurance that public health and safety will not be endangered. This determination must be made by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) prior to issuance of botin the construction permit (CP) and the operating license required to first build and then operate a nuclear power plant.
The NRC is also charged with the responsibility under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, of ensuring that the licensing of nuclear powar plants will not have an adverse effect on a broad range of environmental considerations. To these ends, we have conducted intensive reviews of safety issues and the environmental impact associated with the licensing of the Bailly facility. The llRC staff's Safety Evaluation Report (SER) and its Final Environmental Statement (FES) regarding the Bailly facility were issued in February 1972 and February 1973, respectively. Both titese documents are available for your inspection at the West Chester Township Public Library, 125 So 2nd Street, Chesterton, Indiana 46304.
Following issuance of tnese documents, intensely contested public nearings were held before a Licensing Board from April tc Novenber of 1973. A construc-tion permit (CP) for the Bailly facility was issued in liay 1974 after the Licensing Board issued a favorable decision. This decision was eventually litigated through the federal wurts and was upheld by tne U.S. Supreme Court.
There have been a number of subsequent actions challenging the licensing of the OFFICE )
~~"""
~ ~ ~ " ~ "
s108170060 810805-
.."..". goa aoacx osooog "........
m*
DATEf
- *o 'se%32e e2.
d%C FORM 318 HO 80l NRCM O2dO OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
O A
n u
q Bailly facility in the federal courts by petitioners including thc Attorney-General of Illinois. All documentation pertainins to these !cgal proceedings are also in the Chesterton library.
I believe the safety of the Bailly facility has been demonstrated in the lengtny technical and legal reviews extending over an eignt year period.
While this agency does nnt regulate alternate sources of energy, we do re-quire them to be con 2idered by utilities proposing nuclear power plants.
As part of our respons1Dility under NEPA, we evaluate the technical feasi-bility and economic costs of alternate energy sources in our environmental reviews.
In doing so, we have found that cogeneration of steam and elec-tricity has limited applicability and does not in itself significantly reduce the demand for fuel. For those limited applications where cogeneration is feasible, the fuel economy represents a relatively small savings. Therefore, we co not anticipate that the use of cogeneration will cause a significant decrease in the demand for power.
While the use of solar power has wider application than cogeneration, solar power is not yet economically competitive with more conventional methods of power generation. However, it is possible that solar power could supply a small f raction of this nation's energy within 20 years. While this would be a welcone addition to our energy supply, we do not believe that this al-ternate energy source can replace either large coal-fired facilities or nuclear power plants, especially in heavily industrialized regions.
We have seen a slower increase in the demand for power. We bnlieve this is attributable to the increased cost of energy which has encouraged conserva-tion of energy.
It is not clear, however, that this effect will eliminate the need for new power plants.
The most probable result will be to slow down the schedule for constructing new facilities. With respect to the Bailly f acility, the need for this facility was one of the findings made by the Licensing 30ard in authorizing the issuance of the bcilly CP. Since then, N1P500 ha. continued to assert that the facility is needed to meet its cus-tomers' denana.
You also state your view that "... advanced technology often creates more adverse pollution and problems than people... consider..." We agree that this phenomenon has occurred in the past.
It was in light of this that HEPA was enacted by the Congress in 1969 to require a review and evaluation of adverse environmental impacts which could result from major feceral actions. While the review and evaluation process dictated Dy HEPA does not in itself guarantee that pollution and other probleas will not occur,
the process provides considerable information to the public in the fnrm of Final Environnental Statements. These FES's can then form part of the basis for administrative and legal challenges to the 1mplementation of advanced technology. As discussed earlier, this process was followed in the licensing of the Dailly facility.
"c *t...
""'"4 om>
,NRC FORM 3tB OO UC* NRCM O240 CFFICIR RECORD COPY
~
' usc'Po S8o-3]
o 3_
i trust that our response has addressed your r.ajor concerns regarding the 31111y facility.
If yoc wish any specific information on this plant, please write to t..' URC Project innager, :!. D. Lync'1, at the address on the letter-head or telephone hia at I;1/492-8413.
Si ncerely, Robert L. Tedesco Assista
- ctor for Licensing Division i icensing I
k x
A /.
(IN orn >
...D.L
...0 ELO:
..DLt $lI1....
.....ynch : cz ASchwencer SHLewis RL..T....d. e.s c o.
DL suRuce >
.....N............................
. 7..[. 4..../.8..1...
...... 8.1..... l. 7,/.3...l../.8.1.....
7 7
oney...g,q)........
Ec FORM 318 00-00) NRCM 024o OF11CIAL RECORD COPY usom im-mea,
t i,
4K yl~
f7
~g7" w"
hh, l DjSTRIBUTION ket F.
NRC PDR Ghli~l/fg'r Local PDR-LB#2 file (2)
[ p 'gs,
- [o H. Denton E. Case f
H. Burkow 97
/ tug 00198 1 a-12 W. Russel1
-" y%jjgg '
)
DEsenhut RTedesco C)
RPurple
,I )
f ASchwencer A
DLynch MService SCavanaugh (S\\-710 EHughes LBerry SHanauer RMattson TMurley RVollmer BSnyder PPAS CFitCE)
"""^"'>
D AT E f-
.l.
- oe-ma
. uc i en. r e.,e o n. oca.
ECORD COPY
1
\\
-.PLEASE REVIEW THE DUE DATE IMMEDIATELY_
If the due date does not allow adequate time to respond to this ticket, you may request a revised due date. The request must include a i
valid justificaticn and be submitted through your correspondence coordinator to the NRR mail room.
Such reques, ts for green tickets l
must be made within 3 days after assignment.
Requests for revision of yellow ticket due dates may be made, with justification, through the weekly WITS update.
The revised due date, if approved by PPAS, "ill be used to track division correspondenct completion schedules.
2 h-
L..
4
~
g
,m
..-.3 1,.., -.
g {,,,,
- 0j,o,. -
v,.,
.,,o-i 7
........n..
., n.r wrie si s e.i-s e -ee e
- - ~
^^ - - - - -
M
.g.,..
' _ s _4,
__.L_,'._,.,
Fnone.
154,8 0, ardm="r Dart ntCtrvt0 h(L:
\\
5/12/81~ W ^'"
5/22/81"* "'
NiiR-81'-279 - -
^
'Mrs. Pat Moody:
' ~
svii r,
,'.x. d,. m
...y.,.,.,'q.:' M,ep g 7;,'j*.q;g..y*.g f,;. Q;,f 9.1f,s.E;Q;;<;
. [.r'. QL::,.aJ T. y,,,,3. &
':.b
': i, ! y L;.*
e t,. ;
- l.*...H:.D:nto.nlc;f' &'l.;&gg>~-l**ll.Q:.9 Q 1 Q ;s y K ~[:,f j R-Q Q qi % Q g if; f R ;% E'
,: m, y. c-1
- ~ -
-- re nAmx e n v. e u'.~ ~ ~;n
'n~
- . -.s
..s..
.- s s,,; -
acrio=_=.c
- v. g... g. _
,,g.,,. 3,. m,s;s,-
4
,3,c.
c
'v'6/10/81 '4^s,,
%c g :%
w onre an a... -
u
.g..
co
,. 4..OM
'^
.. u
=c..crio cmwa,
corr o,,.ca.
. car..
4
~t.
-n
...s
_y
.,. _ p q. :p.. : w.:.* n:,
c'.
- i.
- n - : 2.,: s v..
4
~
m.
. y J,wsuuo ro mar.
necasyse er ears casr_arvion:==m u-a.m.o
, submits greivances MAEthebuiEdina. Eirink2t :[i.E. '-
5/22~ Tc asi~? E /!' (;*
i
~
of the Bailly Power' plant c4 ('y % w, $. p uuu m,-
^
1.
PPy ~
1-u z.
~~ ue.-
- p
- Dch..ce/rce,
~
.E) :'
3.
wattson
. x, n.
muer l
~ ~.
Jg g
g 9, v:4; Vollmcr v
, u...mr o n r
,c.x n
~
-y
.A.
.?*
4 %
,[
'.x,., J ', :., ; -
.,.=
s
' <.Q
- k 4..;,.
.., ' ~
.~
'i.,
y,
+ :.;.
g; _ -
js I
4 -
L-IDIBUTION70R ANY my a
- s y
t.
l'Z '" " '
,, D 03!CIgAI,
- 3 03'l
% g v.~.* A. 'Q-A 4 - ;*L v '.;.
+
8' 4
A
~
d
[
IICI Z.r JIVISIOGIDIRECTOR ORDESM -6@M f,:'d O' I.
2.
WITH RZSPONSE u.a muctsan nacut. aron, comunsr<me
,g.
- oame wac-s s MAIL CONTROL FORM I"'-
_. 5 0 Au b M 3355 U. & NLeg;t&AR FI&GuLAT L447 04.sMMIMet's MAIL CONTROL FORM 1
l l
l i
esg.*,r 8
o 8
e
@