ML20040A070
| ML20040A070 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 12/02/1981 |
| From: | Digiacomo C CORTLANDT, NY |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20040A066 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8201200299 | |
| Download: ML20040A070 (3) | |
Text
._
4 TOWN OF CORTLANDT i
MUNICIPAL DutLotNG 1
CRoToN.ON.HuoSoN. N. Y.10520
?
22 J.".'
, 'u..
CHARLES G OsGI ACOMO
.I. ':d'.
M
.r..
- 91# # ?71 5196 i
O c :F'J-1914 e 739 3522
.s u w.
t. ~. e.
i.~.
PRE-HEARING CONFERENCE ON i
INDIAN POINT SAFETY December 2, 19S1 i
k Statement submitted by Charles G. DiGiacomo, Supervisor of the Town of Certland::
As Supervisor of the Town of Cortlandt, there is no person more interested in the safe operation of the Indian Point plants than I.
Although I question the advisability of holding the proceedings being considered today, since the Nuclear Reg-ulatory Commission's own staff suggested that they were not necessary to assure plant safety and since taxpayers will bear much of the cost.
I feel the money could be better spent on NRC prograns.
My remarks on behalf of those who live closest to the plants must be taken into account decisions.
by the board in making its The Town of Cortlandt will not become a formal i
interrenor as I do not feel it is in our best interests to spend tax dellars on the legal fees necessary to take that sten.
Therefore, this statement,and subsecuent submissions which are deemed to be necessary, will constitute the Town's participation.
\\
1; is obvious to people who live in this area that there are two aspects which should be considered and that neither can-be viewed by itself.
4 i
Safety is essential and we will not compromise it ft: any
- her conc.ern.
However. some sense of reason must be intr'oduced when deciding how safe is safe and when contenplating the drastic measures recommended by some parties.
The economic impact of any needless shutdown cf the plants <.ould fall more on the shoulders of Cortlandt residents te.an an" ::hers.
It is cur electricity - - - our leas: extensive source - - - - you arediscussing.
It is our tax base
- cur larges:
ax ratable
- you might be threateninc.
1; is ene cf cur ' rges: ::-- e r:ial contribu::rs you are ta_:.:in: abcut s:
abstr:::1y.
And, ves, it is our safety vou purper: :c have :n 4
minc.
3:
xeep us in mind as vcu delibera:e durin the uncomin"-
1
]
nearings.
0201200299 911217 O
PDR ADOCK 05000247 T
PDR t
. = _ _ _ - - -.
December 2, 1981
),
page 2.
1 RISK t
Certainly risk is something we Cortlandt residents are interested in.
How much risk is acceptahic?
How littic risk is possible?
We are reasonable, well-educated people here in j
Cortlandt.
Yet, we are confused.
j The N.R.C.'s own study last year indicated that, i
although the site left something to be desired, the plant design d
which includes many safety features not found elsewhere, made the overall safety of the plant about the same as any other plant in I
the country, (in spite of the large population in the area.)
Well, if the plant is no more or less safe than other plants, and I
if other plants are not deemed to have unacceptable levels of risk, i
I again must question the spending priorities of the N.R.C.
in i
j holding the upcoming hearings.
EMERGENCY PLANNING 4
The town has taken an active role in formulating i
emergency plans for the area.
We have sponsored meetings of interested parties and have offered suggestions for imorovements.
.Our goal is to have the best emergency plans in the country.
We i
feel that with the most difficult area to plan for, great strides have been made over the past two years to attain that goal.
We will continue to keep close track of the planning process as we prepare for emergency exercises to be held next year.
l ENVIRONMENTA'. IMPACT i
3 A national leader of the N.A.A.C.P. has been quoted I
as saying that nuclear power plants are envi'.onmentally benign.
i This is an especially important point when considering the alterna-tives to Indian Point electricity - - - fossil fuels.
The recent
}
agreement for the protection of the Hudson River speaks well of both the responsible environmental advocates and the utilities on a
each side of the river, including the operators of the Indian Point plants.
t ECONOM!CS The economic centribution of the two plants to this town cannot be over-emphasi:ed.
Many of the town's merchants and commer:ial enterprises rely on the plants for a share of their
{
annual revenues.
.The tax losses posed by shutting doun the nian:s are obvious.
Cest to consumers cf not having available the cheapest source of electricity in the metropolitan area would be excessive.
t I
i December 2,.1981 P3pc 3.
Let's review the facts - -
As you know, the General Accounting Office, at the request of Congressman Ric:tard
)
Ottinger, (who appears to oppose continued operation of the plants),
last year completed an analysis of the economic impact of a permanent shutdown of the two operating Indian Point plants.
i 1
Major findings were:
1 l
1.
Closing of the two plants in'itially could cost
- j New York City and h'estchester County consumers more than 5600 million a year.
I 2.
'This figure could rise to more than $1 4 billion t
by 1992.
.3.
Oil fired generation would be the only major source of replacement power if the plants were closed, and oil requirements would increase by almost twenty million barrels in the first year of the shutdown.
This figure would gradually decrease 4
in subsequent years as alternative sources of power became available.
i t
)
l To repeat, we will not compromise our commitment to i
safety.
Neither will we compromise our commitment to the economic well-being of our residents.
In closing, I would like to thank you for he?C' n our request to hold such hearings in the Town of Cortlandt un.
would r'eiterate that any future conferences or hearings be coi4 acted 3
in this area.
1 J
e f
4 i
+s-m,,
r
,,w,
--w------
m------
---..,-c-
---ga r,--
--,-------~~--.-v-