ML20011A236

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Focus of cross-exam & Expert Witnesses.No Expert Witnesses Will Be presented.Cross-exam Will Be Limited to Contentions 4,9,14,20 & 21.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence
ML20011A236
Person / Time
Site: Susquehanna  Talen Energy icon.png
Issue date: 09/29/1981
From: Schultz G
SUSQUEHANNA ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCATES
To:
References
NUDOCS 8110080351
Download: ML20011A236 (3)


Text

e

n. -.,, ,

O p

.( o , Doc e i

Pn
- . . . . . . 1 tcmc e

'%_ ~J OCT 5fgSf>h -

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA $$((;'[j?""irty i .

1 NUCLEAR REGULATORY CCIGIISSION e i d . c. ** -

Secte:ber G .i w' t

BEFCRE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING EOARD -

[IntheMatterof ggj l PENNSYLVANI A P0k'IR & LIGHT CO.

and Docket Nos. 50-387 50-3 , m ALLEGHENY ELECTRIC CCOPERATIVE, )

1 (Susquehanna Steam Electric INC.

Station Units 1 & 2) ) x

,e (

/C ,

J (

l 4

] OCT 7 nggh :

! SUSQUEHANN A ENVIRONMENTAL ADVCCATES

  • 23/" ;" *8 Q t FOCUS OF CROSS EIAMINATICN/ EXPERT WITNESSESy ggV i

1 EXPERT WITNESSES Q!b I

l Due mainly to lack of funds, Susquehanna Environmental ,

3 Advocates will present no expert witnesses to testify.

f 2. FOCUS OF CROSS EX/JIINATION

The f ocus of Susquehanna's Environmental Advocates

  • cross examination on various contentions is as f611ows:

, Contention t.: l

'l q Cn past growth of electric usage and potential for future 3

growth j i

j On the alleged savings to consumers from Susquehanna ,

On PPL's censervation programs, including conservation efforts that have been ignored by PPL.

On PPL's solar programs, including those not in use by

PPL.

On alternatives to the plant. ,

l Contention 9:

Cn the methodology, cost, and financial ability of FPL to pay for decoccissioning.  !

l On the long ter= storage or disposal of the pcwer plant. I 0 h

'8110000351 810929

'PDR ADOCK 05000387 PDR

$ g\

3 '

l l

[

! Contention 14:

~: Cn past performance of similiar power plants.

On perfor=ance of the plant as it grows cider.

Contention 20:

On specific sections of the e=ergency plan that we centend do not conform to the regulations.

On the ability of the county to carry out the plan.

On the location of e=er6ency evacuation centers.

.I t On past state =ents of county officials concerning nuclear 1 power and evacuation. '

Il

( Contention 21 :

1 On the re=edial =easures perscribed by the NRC - their i

adequacy. Do they provide a sufficient =argin of. safety?

1 -

Respectfully sub=itted:

I m: hvoel S '

G k-1 5

I

~

i GERAIS R. SCHULTZ  ;

4

c S gC.Q _ 'N _

.  ; y s C ..e g7 -

- 0 9 L, 51C M.> Q>i-OlW E E D 'Y' UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 9 Cie '.di:i'"

t NUCLEAR REGULATORY COIEISSION ,

Septe=ber 29,Q- > ,

EEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING E0ARD 1IntheMatterof:

t PENNSYLVANIA POWER & LIGHT CO.

and ) Docket Nes. 50-367  ;

) 50 388

~

ALLEGHENY ELECTRIC CCOFERATIVE, )

INC. )

] (Susquehanna Steam Electric )

il Station Units 1 & 2) )

el

! CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE g .

l'

,1,
I t

This is to certify that copies of the foregoing"Suscuehanna

?

1 Environmental Advocates Focus of Cross Examination / Expert Witnesses"

'l IIwere served by First Class Mail September 30, 1981 to all parties.

.1 4

Dated: September 29, 1981 DD N c - .

GERALD R. SCHULTZ

)

l i

i e

-