ML20040E368

Testimony of R Fertik on 820121 Before NRC Re Consequences of Shutdown at Facilities.Supports Shutdown

ML20040E368
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	01/21/1982
From:	Fertik R AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To:
References
ISSUANCES-SP, NUDOCS 8202040235
Download: ML20040E368 (3)

Text

>

sm N

-~

PAGE 1 y' x

-,,m.

g e %[#%g g

'82 JM 28 P4 :05 E

TE9TIMONY BEFORE THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g

h JANUARY 21, 1989

/

. cci:

lY BY bP 5 '_.[,1...y(.d d ROBERT FERTIK

..,.gy GOOD EVENING.

MY NAME IS BOB FERTIK, AND I AM HERE AS A RESIDENT OF OSSINING.

THE ISSUE I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS IS QUESTION #6 ON THE MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DATED JANUARY 8, 1981.

THAT QUESTION IS: WHAT WOULD BE THE ENERGY, ENVIRONMENTAL, ECONOMIC, OR OTHER CONSEOUENCES OF A SHUTDOWN OF INDIAN POINT UNIT 2 AND/OR UNIT ?.

THE BULK OF THE ISSUES WHICH THIS PANEL WILL BE ADDRESSING IN THE COMING MONTHS WILL RELATE TO THE SAFETY ISSUES.

I BELIEVE THAT THIS PANEL WILL FIND THAT THERE ARE SERIOUS SAFETY PROBLEMS AND SIGNIFICANT POTENTIAL RISKS TO THE POPULATION.

IF THAT IS SO, THEN IT WILL BE IMPORTANT TO WEIGH THE COSTS OF CLOSING THE PLANT 9.

SUPERFICIALLY, IT WOULD BE VERY EASY FOR THIS PANEL TO CALCULATE THE ENERGY AND ECONOMIC COSTS OF CLOSING THE PLANT 9 BY PRICING THE COST OF POWER WHICH WOULD BE REQUIRED TO REPLACE IT IN ORDER TO CONTINUE SUPPLYING ELECTRICITY TO THE METROPOLITAN REGION.

IF OIL POWER WERE USED FOR COMPARISON, NO DOUBT THE ESTIMATED COSTS OF REPLACING POWER FROM INDIAN POINT WOULD BE STAGGERING.

BUT I BELIEVE THAT SUCH AN ANALYSIS WOULD BE INCORRECT.

CERTAINLY, ADJUSTMENTS WOULD NEED TO BE MADE IF INDIAN POINT WERE CLOSED.

BUT WE MUST FRAME THE QUESTIONS CAREFULLY.

FIRST, HON MUCH OF AN ADJUSTMENT WOULD REALLY BE NECESSARY?

SECOND, DO WE HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY AND CAPACITY TO ADJUST?

AND THIRD, HOW MUCH WOULD IT COST TO ADJUST?

l HITH THESE OUESTIONS IN MIND, I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT THE COSTS OF CLOSING THE PLANTS WOULD NOT BE DEVASTATING, IF THE FOLLOWING WERE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT:

1)

CON ED CURRENTLY HAS 44% EXCESS GENERATING CAPACITY ACCOPDING TO THE NEW YORK TIMES!

2)

THERE IS CONSIDERABLE CAPACITY FOR CONSERVATION OF ELECTRICITY.

ACCORDING TO A MAJOR STUDY BY THE CITY OF NEW YORK, ENTITLED

" ENERGY CONSUMPTION IN NEW YORK CITY: PATTERNS AND OPPORTUNITIES,"

THE MINIMUM POTENTIAL FOR REDUCING ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION IN NEW YOR!

CITY IS 5.7 BILLION KILOWATT-HOURS, OR NEARLY 20% OF THE 29 BILLION KILOWATT HOURS CONSUMED IN 1979.

3)

LOCALLY GENERATED ELECTRICITY COULD BE REPLACED TO SOME EXTENTF DSol

/

8202040235 820121

[

PDR ADOCK 05000247

//6 T

PDR

PAGE 2

BY POWER GENERATED UPSTATE AND IN CANADA, WHICH CAN BE ECONOMICALLY DELIVERED TO THE METROPOLITAN AREA.

WHILE THIS MAY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION OF ADDITIONAL HIGH-VOLTAGE TRANSMISSION LINES, THE ECON-OMIC'AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT WOULD SURELY BE FAR LE99 THAN THE RECURRENT EPISODES OF RADIATION RELEASES FROM INDIAN POINT.

CANADIAN UTILITIES ARE GREATLY EXPANDING THEIR HYDROELECTRIC CAPACITY ~.

AND THIS POWER 19 INTENDED FOR SALE TO THE UNITED STATES.

4)

THE COSTS OF KEEPING INDIAN POINT OPERATING WILL BE SIGNIFICANT IN LIGHT OF THE ACCELERATED DETERIORATION OF CRITICAL COMPONENTS, AND TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE COSTS OF STOCKPILING AND EVENTUALLY DISPOSING OF HIGH LEVEL NUCLEAR WASTES; AND 5)

THE MONEY WHICH WILL GO INTO KEEPING INDIAN POINT WITHIN ALLOWABLE SAFETY LIMITS COULD INSTEAD BE INVESTED IN ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCES, OR MADE AVAILABLE TO CONSUMERS AS LOW COST FINANCING FOR ENERGY CONSERVATION MEASURES.

MY GENERAL ARGUMENT, THEN, IS THAT REMOVING INDI AN POINT FROM THE METROPOLITAN ELECTRIC SUPPLY WOULD NOT LEAVE U9 WITHOUT POWERS IN ADDITION TO THE PRESENT 44% EXCESS GENERATING CAPACITY, THE MINIMUM CONSERVATION POTENTIAL FOR THE AREA 19 AROUND 20%; IF THAT WERE REALIZED, WE WOULD HAVE 64% EXCES9 CAPACITY.

BEYOND THAT, POWER FROM UPSTATE AND CANADA COULD FURTHER REDUCE OUR DEMAND FOR LOCALLY GENERATED ELECTRICITY.

ON THE OTHER HAND, THEP WILL BE SIGNIFICANT C09T9 ASSOCIATED WITH KEEPING INDIAN POINT 9AFE, AND THE MONEY INVESTED IN THI9 WAY COULD BE USED INSTEAD TO FINANCE ALTERNATIVE ENERGY 900RCE9 AND GREATER CONSERVATION MEASURES.

BASED ON THIS ANALYSIS, I WOULD 9AY THAT THE ENERGY AND ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCE 9 OF CLO9ING INDIAN POINT ARE NOT 9IGNIFICANT ENOUGH TO OUTWEIGH THE EXTRA-ORDINARILY LARGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO ARE PROXIMATE TO THE9E NUCLEAR l

REACTORS.

I WHEN THE INDIAN POINT REACTORS WERE PLANNED, NE WERE TOLD THAT ELECTRICITY WOULD BECOME 90 CHEAP THAT THE UTILITY WOULD NOT NEED TO i

IN9 TALL METERS IN OUR HOMES.

WE NOW 9EE WHAT A FARCE THAT IDEA W4S.

NOW THAT WE HAVE LIVED THROUGH THE THREE MILE ACCIDENT, WE MUST ACCURATELY MEASURE THE DANGER THAT WE FACE LIVING NEAR INDIAN POINT.

CERTAINLY CON EDISON'S SAFETY RECORD DOES NOT IN9PIRE CONFIDENCE; THIS COMPANY HA9 LONG DEMON 9TRATED ITS INDIFFERENCE TO THE SAFETY OF WORKER 9 AND RE9IDENTS OF THIS AREA.

THE NRC CANNOT PAPER OVER THIS HISTORY OF POOR MANAGEMENT.

I AM CURRENTLY SERVING As CHAIRPERSON OF A LOCAL CITIZEN 9 GROUP CALLED

-WESTCHESTER PEOPLE OUTRAGED WITH ENERGY RATE 9, OR P.O.W.E.R.

WE FORMED AFTER THE OCTOBER 19SO ACCIDENT, BECAUSE WE WERE OUfRAGED THAT CONSUMERS WERE ASKED TO PAY A 10% 9URCHARGE TO REPLACE THE POWER THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN GENERATED AT NUMBER 2, BUT FOR CON ED'S MISTAKE 9.

RECENTLY, THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION RULED IN OUR FAVOR, AND CON ED WILL HAVE TO REFUND THIS SURCHARGE.

BUT LAST FEBRUARY, CON ED RECEIVED A 17.?% REVENUE INCREASE, NHICH RE9ULTED IN RATE INCREASES A9 HIGH A9 50%.

AT THAT POINT, WE MOBILIZED SUPPORT FOR A PROPO9AL IN THE COUNTY LEGISLATURE TO CREATE A MUNICIPAL UTILITY FOR WESTCHE9TER, IN ORDER TO REPLACE CON EDISON.

I BELIEVE THIS PANEL SHOULD BE AWARE THAT ON MARCH 30, 1982, WESTCHESTER

PAGE 3

VOTERS WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE TO CREATE A MUNICIPAL UTILITY AGENCY.

IF THIS PASSES, THE AGENCY WILL FIRST ATTEMPT TO SIGN CONTRACTS WITH THE POWER AUTHORITY OF NEW YORK STATE FOR HYDROELECTRIC POWER FROM UPSTATE, WHICH IS FAR CHEAPER THAN CON EDISON'S POWER.

WE HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT UE CCULD OBTAIN AS MUCH AS 300 MW OF POWER, WHICH IS NEARLY ONE-THIRD OF OUR DEMAND.

YOU CAN SEE THAT WESTCHE9TER MAY NOT NEED ANY POHER FROM INDIAN POINT AT ALL.

IF THIS IS THE CASE, THEN WHY SHOULD NEARLY I MILLION WESTCHESTER RESIDENTS BE LIVING IN THE SHADOW OF INDIAN POINT?

MY ANALYSIS IS MEANT TO BE SUGGESTIVE, NOT DEFINITIVE.

IF SOMEONE WOULD PAY ME A SMALL PORTION OF THE 9ALARIE9 BEING PAID TO CON ED'9 STAFF, I UOULD OLADLY DELVE MORE THOROUGHLY INTO THESE POINT 9.

IN9TEAD, I MUST LEAVE IT TO THE STAFF OF THE NRC TO FOLLOW MY LINE OF ARGUMENT AND 9EE IF IT HA9 MERIT.

I BELIEVE IT DOE 9.

THANK YOU.

l l

l