ML20054H607

Statement to Be Entered in 820526 Hearing Record Opposing Opening of Plant

ML20054H607
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	05/26/1982
From:	Michta D AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To:
Shared Package
ML20054H606	List: ML20054H605 ML20054H607
References
NUDOCS 8206240256
Download: ML20054H607 (2)

Text

- . ______ __

7 i

' ~

Prepared #or URC HearinF for May 26, 1082 My name is Dorothy Fichta. I am hera as e representative of the Eagle Estates Civic Associntion of Fedford, New York.

We have over 1600 hores in our development and are situated' just on the 10 mile circle from the Shoreham Nuclear Flant.

The're are several. reasons uhy I an here tedey in oppcsition -

to the opening or crantina of a temporary operating license for Sboreham.

REASCU 1 is Safety. We feel that massive safety hazards exist at SPorehar. We hava spoken to ten who worked at the construction site. They tall us the pinnt is a safety horror. This is why we insist on a ecmnlata physical inspection and a co riete desien review cf the plant.

l REASOM 2 is Cost'. In en article publishaf in the Fay 82 issue l

of life magazine, which was written about Euclear Founr Flants h

across the U.S. ,. it tas stated that "There have been outright cases of tismanagecent; in Suffolk County, N.Y., the utility b illding Shoreham Unclear Plant, chose a reactor thet was prone to dancerous vibrations in the event of an accident. The cost of needed reinrorcenene has n'elped te insure that Shoreham, when s it roes'on line, will cenerate the tost expensive electricity l in the world. .

REASCU 3 is the Tennorary Oceratine Issue. MR 2330, section-12(a) states that a terrorary operating licese may be issued B in adva.nce of the conrletion of any hearing. Then =ay I ask, 14hy nre we hare now?

How, then, cauld a complete inspection take place when vital arenn of the ulant are "CFF LIMITS" to the inspection tear,, Additionally, it states that all hearines E

conducted in connection with the issuance of a tenporary B206240256 yDRADOCKO!hh0hh2 P&TD ___ ___ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ f

N ' .A A ._

operating license may be treated as part of,.and consolidated with,

.any hearings which are conducted for the issuance of a final operating license,. in crder not to duplicate efforts and then could EXPEDITE the issuance of the final operating license.

In a report'from the Comrittee on Enercy and Commerce it was notad that it ras devoting insufficient attention to gatting safety issues straightened out and too much attention to getting out licanses. Section 12(b) stntes that e te"pernry 1*. cense r.>:y i 1

initially authorize fuel looding, testing and operctier of the ,

1 reactor ne a srecific' power level, not to exceed 5 per cent

• of ratad full thermal power. Just innrine, if durinn tMs i.esting, {

something.went Frong. At that time, there uould ha ,ro f erse.ble g I;

evacuation plan for Suffolk County. This brings. me te y final 5 5

and rest important peint. I REASC: 4 is EVACUATICU CF L.I. We feel LILOO has circ.umvented L.I. lagislatures nnd went direct'ly to the 9tnte for a:provel or -

their eo enlled " Evacuation Plan". Why did they do tkis, we erk?

The answer is si p'le. "LCI:G ISLAND CAUNCT PE SAFELY EV;.CUATEDil" '

Thera vill be not way out. Scho-1 buses, which are 01:endy pickine .

. s un cPildren fro? school in 2-3 trips at different tirer, would h ba needed to evacuate our children immediately. The L 3R nould not be adeauste for transportation of evacuees.. Roac ways would .

J be ir.pa s sa bl e .. Cormuters' wives would he t ra pped . **here

- would this leave us. Rirht where we are. k E

I feel the is no further need to expound upon these issues, and 2 O

I leave 'you v'Ah the social burden and moral comiitrent to render 5 iii a f. c e' and orpropriate decinion on this catters a decision ubich [

E will datermine whether life on Iong Isinnd will rennin "frer. o c 3 T

n denrer and uncertainty" or " verse on the precipice cf nucler.r b trnredy." E' t

7

, .