ML20067C823
| ML20067C823 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 02/04/1991 |
| From: | Mcgranery J DOW, LOHNES & ALBERTSON, LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO., SCIENTISTS & ENGINEERS FOR SECURE ENERGY |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20067C825 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-#191-11392 91-621-01-OLA, 91-621-1-OLA, OLA, NUDOCS 9102120215 | |
| Download: ML20067C823 (3) | |
Text
- f f hh UNITED STATES OF )MERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY C(/MMISSION
- y...
ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Beforo Administrative Judges Morton B. Margulies, Chairman Dr. George A. rerguson
,',v '
Dr. Jorry R.
Kline
)
In the Matter of
)
Docket No. 50-322"OLA
)
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY
)
ASLBP No. 91-621-01-OLA
)
(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, )
(Emergency Preparedness Unit 1)
)
Amendment)
)
)
SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS FOR SECURE ENERGY, INC.
AMENDMENT TO ITS REQUEST FOR HEARING AND PETJTION TO INTERVENE Pursuant to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board's
("ASLB") Memorandum and Order of January 8, 1991
(" January 8 9rder") in the above-captioned proceeding, Sciantists and Engineers for Securo Energy, Inc. ("Potitioner") amends, by counsel, itu request for hearing and petition to intervono in that proceeding by providing affidavits from the Executive Director and its members, Dr. John L.
Bateman, Eena-Mai Franz, Andrew P. Ilull, Dr. Stephen V.
Malolino, Joseph Scrandis, John R.
Stohn, requesting representation by Petitioner addressing the injury in fact to its orgar.izational interests and the interest of its members who have authorized it to act for them (attachod) as well as detailing further herein contentions to be raised in tr.is proceeding, as specified below.
Petitioner agrees with the ASLB's January 8 Order that the overarching issue in the Shoreham Emergency Preparedness Plan DhIhM05C0032
[
5 91Opo4 O
)'
~gn f
proceeding is:
Should the amendment of the Shoreham emergoney preparedness plan be sustained?
January 8 Qrder at 9.
Petitioner also asserts that the specific aspects identified in Section III of its original petition and request for hearing in the above-captioned matter are subsidiary issues to the overarching issue identified by the Board.
Petitioner also contends on behalf of ituolf and its represented members that the amendment deprives the LILCO Emergency Responso Organization ("LER0") of the adequato t
offectiveness to moot the requirements of 10 C.F.R. 66 50.34, i
50.47, 50.54 & Part 50, Appendix E (1990) for a full power operating roactor licensee.
Petitioner also contends on its own behalf and that of its represented members that when combined with the increased risk of a radiological incident due to the reduced physical secut'ty plan, the climination of LERO doutroys LILCO's ability to assure a smooth ovacuation of the omorgency.
planning zone in'the ovent of a radiological incidt.it, including an incident of radiological sabotago.
In particular, in the language specified by the Board, L
Potjtioner specifies as a particular aspect on which it wishes to l
l inte rveno :
"Whether the licenso amendment which permits i.
discontinuance of quarterly drills involves a significant l
reduction in the margin of safoty and increaso [in) the probability.(and consequences) of radiological harm".
January b j
QIdgI at 45.
Petitioner also repeats its contentien that there-is an issuo whether, under 10 C.F.R. 5 51.21, an environmental assessment is required of the proposed amendment.
And Petitioner
~ - -. -
. -. - ~.-.
., further states as a contention whether, if such an environmental assessment is required for a pronosed amendment, the current amendment should be vacated, pending such an assessment.
Finally, Petitioner specifies the issues of (a) whether the licensee furnished the Commission with a reasoned analysis about the issue of no significant hazards consideration complying with Commission's standards, (b) whether the 10 C.F.R. $ 50.91(b) procedures were followed and in either case, if not, whether the amendment should be vacated.
WilEREFORE, Petitioner renews its request for the remedies noted in the original petition, contends that the injuries resulting from the action which is the subject of this proceeding are likely to remedied by a favorable decision granting the relief sought (including such other relief as the ASLB dooms appropriate), and requests that the action be set down for hearing after a pre-hearing conference and appropriate discovery.
Respectfully submitted,
/n e
,//
1 February-4, 1991
.. u -
se James P. McGranery, Jff Ddw, Lohnes & Albertson Suite 500 1255 Twenty-Third Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20037 (202) 857-2929 Counsel for the Petitioner Scientist and Engineers for Secure Energy, Inc.
i
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Before Administrative Judges:
Morton B. Margulies, Chairman Dr. George A. Ferguson Dr. Jerry R. Klino
)
In the Matter of
)
)
Docket No. 5 0-3 2 2 -O LA Long Island Lighting Company
)
Consideration of Isn' lance of Amendment
)
ASLBP No.
To Facility Operating Licenso and
)
91 - 6 21- 01-O LA Proposed No Significant Fazards
)
Consideration Determination and
)
Opportunity for Hearing
)
(Emergency Preparedness Activities)
)
(55 Fed. Reg. 12076 March 30, 1990)
)
)
AFFIDAVIT OF ORGANIZATIONAL INTEREST BY MIRO M. TODOROVICH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF SCIMLTJETS AND ENGINEERS FOR SECURE ENERGY. INC.
Miro M. Todorovich, being duly sworn, says as follows:
1.
I, Miro M. Todorovich, am the Executive Director of Scientists and Engincors for Secure Energy, Inc. ("SE ")
- I 2
reside at Ravina Road, Rt.
1, Box 321, Patterson, New York 12563.
I was a founding member of SE in 1976 and have been the duly 2
elected Executivo Director since that time.
As Executive i
Director, I: collect data and information about events of interest to SE 's members; receive and summarize members' views 2
on matters of common concern covered by the charter and bylaws of l
the organization; help formulate positions reficcting the knowledge, views and sentiments of SE members; engage the 2
D02It0DW&
i 1
organization in educational, informational, litigation er other a
j activities implementing the wishes of the nombership and SE 's g
Doard of Directors for actions in the public interest.
In this i
j jnstance, I have been directed to seek intervenor status for SE, in the various segmented NRC proceedings related to the decommincioning of the shoreham Nuclear Power station
("shoreham") so that SE, can fulfill some of its authorir.ed purposes by representing its organizational intorests and the health, safety and environmental interests of its members in those proceedings as authorized by those members.
J i
2.
SE, is a not-for-profit organization formed under the lawn of the Stato of New York and qualified under IRC i 501(c) (3).
The organization's membership includes over 1200 scientists and engincorn.
SE also receives additional support 2
from layperson sponsors who support to organization's mission.
3.
SE, is a group of professionals, all exports in their chonon fields, who are dedicated, among other thingn, to the correction of the alarming degree of minunderstanding that permeates national onergy debate.
Through public forums, interaction with government leaders, internal communication about technical issues and active liaison with'the nation's
-journalisto, SE seeks to show that a majority of responaible-2 scientists support the value of technical innovation in all fields-and,.particularly, in.onergy.,
. -,. ~.- _. _.. _ _ ___
s.
,?,r,w
-,,-e
,w,.,r,.-+..-s.,m.,m..sn,-,wm-nw.--.,,-n-,,+w,n.aa
_m,m,,wm m,
..,wn,.
,,r,.,,,,,,
,w g o m, g g e m,,,,..
,,~-g,,rr,
,--.,-,,,g--------.
l 4.
The use of electricity continues grow.
Non-renovable fossil-fuels face inevitable depletion and their combus-lon contributes to acid rain, the greenhouse ofrect, apparent changes in our weather pattern, and air pollution generally.
Thus, S E, supporto the utilization of atmospherically clean and domestically socure nuclear power to safely moot our eletctric energy noods.
5.
In the Northeastern part of the United States, the increaulnq demand for electricity has been thus far act by increased reliance on imported oil and hydro end nucicar-cloctricity imported from Canada.
The adjacent Canadian provinces have responded to the American appetito for electrical power by planning construction of ten more nuclear powet* plants in Ontario and at least two others in Quebec.
If Shoreham in not put.on lino, the Canadians will be able to further increase the U.S. foreign trade imbalanco.
This increano in likely to be particularly dramatic because the cost of Canadian electricity export is tied to the averago cost of American oil-produced electricity and that cost is expected to continue to rino.
In short then, while our neighbors to the north are expanding their l
nuclear power production, we in the power-thirsty Northeast are not only. bent on dismantling a perfectly operable, statu-of-tho-art, nuclear power installation but also contemplato, according to the current New York Stato agreement, replacing it by a combination of new U.S.
fossil-fuel plants and purchasos from Canada.
This plan will foul our atmosphoro, increase *he average cost of electricity, and provide the canadian economy with a windfall profit.
In the view of SE, members, this courso of action with the Shoreham plant makes neither hoalth, safety, environmental nor economic sense.
has participated extensively 6.
Sinco its inception, SE2 in the debate of issues in the nuclear industry.
Bosidos having been invited to advice administrators, logislators and agency and commission officials throughout the country on such issues as the Three Mile Island cleanup, nuclear insurance programn, reprocessing of spent fuels, waste disposal, matorials transportation, the breeder reactor program, nuclear licensing delays and regulatory reform of the licenJing process, SE has 2
previously participated in stages of nuclear power plant licensing procoodings in favor of the utilization of r.uclear power for the safe and economical production of electricity.
has been a participant in the ongoing debate In particular, SE2 on various issues in connection with Shoreham and has continually favorod utilization of the facility.
7.
Given the organizational interoats described abovo, SE, is naturally interestod in und concornod abouc the prosent proposal to decommisalon the recently licensed, brand new, stato-
-of-the-art Shoreham.
j I
l l
(
8.
SE is concerned that the decommissioning of Shoreham 2
is presently underway despite the lack of prior safety or
~
environmental review evaluating the safety or environmental impacts of, and alternatives to, the decommissioning proposal as required by the National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA").
S E, has a right to comment upon an environmental impact statement
("EIS") to be prepared on the decommissioning proposal before
- hat proposal is implemented or before steps are taken which tend to limit the choice of alternatives to that proposal.
The actions taken by Shoreham's licensee, the Long Island Lighting Ccapany - ("LILCo"), and permitted by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC"), to date have already begun to seriously prejudice consideration of the alternative of operating Shorcham.
The mout recont actions in the steadily lengthening chain of actions in furtheranco of, or premised upon, decommissioning, include the NRC's issuance an immediately offective confirmatory order and proposed licenso amendments allowing LILCO to roduce its commitments to physical security and to cease its offsite emergency preparedness activities.
Both the NRC and LILCO are content to ignore the. mandate of NEPA and. thereby deny SE, its right to participate in the decisionmaking process.
Over seventoon months ago, SE submitted a request for NRC action 2
under-the provisions of Section 2.206 of the NRC regulrJ'uns.
SE is left with no alternative but to pursue its organisational-2 ------------------------.---------
1
intorocto through administrative hearings offered on the segmented decommissioning actions.
9.
SE also has an organizational interest in eliciting 2
information on the decomminaioning of Shoroham for the bonofit of its members who live and/or work noar the plant so that they can carry out SE 's mission on a local lovel by informing the local r
governmental leaders and the other interested individuals and groups in the Shoreham area of the ensironmental implications of the proposal to decommlusion Shorcham.
10.
And if the scope of this procooding is narrowed to its relationship to the choice among the alternatives for decommissioning modo, I believe my health, safety and environmental interontn would be harmed by any actionn inconnintent with monthballing the plant ("SAFSTOR").
11.
SE has joined the Shoreham-Wading River Central School 2
District
(" School District") in seeking to intervono in hoarings to be hold on the Confirmatory Order and the licenso amandmont requests affecting both Physical Security and Offsite Emergency Preparedness.
The issues raised by all of these actions significantly overlap due to the fact that they all are either in furthorance of the deconmissioning proponal or depend on that proposal for their juntification.
SE f avors the conso:,idation 2
l l l
f i
of these three proceedings as the most efficient and expeditious way to consider the issues raised by the School District and SE,.
SE, also submits that such consolidation is demanded by NEPA bocuase all of these segmented proposals and actions are, in fact, part of a single proposal, are cumulatively significant, and have no utility independent of the decommissioning proposal.
I 1
[!
(, '
Miro M. Todorovich Executive Director
/
3.,+,-
5
-l / day of [6 f -C' M" -f s-Z is/
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN BEFORE ME, on 1991.
g
,y
. _ /4?va.:)
p' $%:.
cf Notary Public n
o.
D ' #. c -
My comminnion expires:
FFtANCIS DI.NNETI Notary Pubbe, $ tite of New York No. 314347001 Quahtied in Queens County Commission Espires Aus 30.1903 i
l l
l
)
4 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA S
NUCLEAR REGUIATORY COMMISSION f
1 i
ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING DOARD
.Before Administrative Judges:
Morton B. Margulies, Chairman Dr. George A. Ferptson Dr. Jerry R. Kline 1
)
In the Matter of
)
)
Docket No. 50-322-01A Long Island Lighting Company
}
Consideration of Issuance of Amendment
)
ASLBP No.
To Facility Operating License and
)
91-621-01-OLA 3
-Proposed No-Significant Hazards
)
Consideration Determination and
)
Opportunity for Hearing
)
(Emergency Preparedness Activities)
-)
(55 Fed. Reg. 12076 March 30, 1990)
)
)
AFFIDAVIT-OF JOHN L. BATEMAN, M.D.
John L. Bateman, M.D., being duly sworn, says as follovst 1.
I, John L. Bateman, reside at 10 Cameron Drive, New York 11743 which is just over twenty-eight miles Huntingtong from tho.Shoreham Nuclear Power Station ("Shoreham Plant").
I have owned this property for-over ten years.
Thus, I live within the fifty mile geographical zone utilized by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC") to determine whether a party is sufficiently threatened by the radiological hazard and other environmental impacts of the proposal to establish the requisite interest-and standing for intervention as of right.
i J
4 2.
I also own a thirty-seven foot o' Day center cockpit sloop (sailboat) moored in Huntington Harbor, New York 11743 which is just ovce twenty-eight miles from the Shoreham plant and is, therefore, also within the geographical zone of interest.
3.
I am presently employed by V.A. Medical center (115) in Northport, New York 11768 as the Associate chief of Nuclear Medicine Service (diagnostic radioisotopo imaging and therapy).
The Medical center is located about twenty-three niles from the shorchan Plant.
I have worked there as a physician for almost sixteen years.
Thus, the majority of my time, whether I am at work, at home, or relaxing on my boat, is sp2nt within the geographical zone of interest established by the NRc.
Prior to taking my current position at the V.A. Medical center, I spent more than thirteen years in fast neutron and photon radiation biology / medical rosearch at the Medical Research center at Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York 11973.
An a nuclear modicine physician, I am familiar with both the benefits and risks of nuclear power plants.
I strongly support the use of nuclear power to meet our nation's energy needs in a safe, economical, and environmentally benign manner.
In this era of escalating energy need and fossil-fuel pollution of our environment, including the disasterous effects of acid rain, it is critical that officient non-polluting sources of energy, like nuclear energy, be encouraged and supported. - _.
I have boon a member of Scientists and Engineers for 4.
secure Enorgy, Inc. ("SE ") since early in 1990.
I authorize SE 2
to reprosent my intorests, as doncribed herein, in any proceedings to bo held in connection with the Long Island Lighting Company's ("LILco") proposed license amendment adding a license cord' 'ien which negaton application of several existing licenne cono tiann while the reactor is in the "dctueled state."
This license amendment, when coupled with related pending requesto for perminnion from the NRC, vould allow LILCO to cease its emergoney preparedness activition altogether.
I an concernod that the proposed amendment constituten 5.
another step in the decommissioning process presently underway at Shorcham in violation of my rights under the National Environmental Policy Act ("HEPA").
i do not believe that any stepn in furtherance of Shorcham's decommissioning should be implemented until a Final Environmental Impact Statement ("FEIS")
cvaluating tho impacts of, and alternatives to, the entire decommissioning proposal has been coupleted in compliance with the terms of HEPA and the NRC's own regulations.
If the NRC allows stops which are clearly in furtherance of decommissioning, and have no necessary independent utility, to be implemented at Shoreham prior to the necessary NEPA review, my rights, and the rights of thona similarly situated, to have an opportunity for moaningful comment on the environmental ennaideration of the decommlunioning proposal will be prejudiced, if not completely l
denied.
The proposed amendment which effectively allows LILCO to ceases all emergency preparedness activities presupposes that dacommissioning in a forogono conclusion.
Despite the fact that HEPA mandates maintenance of the stAtMA gun pending preparation of an FEIS and a finni decision so that alternatives to the proposed action are not prematurely foreclosed, the proposed amendment represents a further rotreat from the requirements of LILCo's full-power operating license prior to any environmental review of the proposed decommincioning.
6.
The proposed amendment represents a threat to my personal radiologieni hon 1th and safoty and to my real and personal property in violation of my rights under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.
The proposed amendmont is an integral part of a LILco's attempt to censo emergoney preparedness activitics.
Any decrease in such activition at a plant licensed for full-power operation increases the radiological hazard posed by the plant.
The detrimental health and safety impacts on those in closo proximity to Shoreham from an accidental releaso of fission products would be significantly greater were the accident to occur while Shoreham in without a well-trained emergency respvnse organization to stem those impacts.
7.
As a Long Island resident, I am interosted in actions which will have a direct offect on the availability of reliable I
~. _.
. =_..
electricity to meet my needs and those of my family and the community as a whole.
I understand that Long Island is presently i
at tha full capacity of the existing natural gas pipelines which supply this area and that there is inadequate reserve capacity for the growing electric energy demands of the area.
- Thus, either Shoreham must be operated or alternative generating facilities will have to be built and operated.
Because natural gas supplies cannot easily be increased, oil-burning plants will inevitably be needed to replace shoreham.
These plants, in turn, will emit pollution lowering air quality in the region and contributing to global warming and acid rain.
These effects of Shoroham's decommissioning will have detrimental effects on my health and on the quality of the natural environment in which I live day-to-day.
This calls for serious consideration of the alternatives to decommissioning.
8.
And if the scope of this proceeding is narrowed to its relationship to the choice among the alternatives for decommissioning mode, I believe my health, safety and environmental interests would be harmed by any_ actions inconsistent with mothballing the plant ("sArsTOR").
9.
I understand that SE has been joined by the Shoreham-7 Wading River central school District (" School District") in seeking to intervene in the hearing to be held not only on the proposed amendment allowing the cessation of emergency l
preparedness activities, but also in hearings to consider the implications of the immediately effective Confirmatory order issued by the NRC on March 29, 1990 and LILCo's licenso amendment request affecting the Physical Security Plan.
I also understand that the issues raised by all of these actions significantly overlap due to the fact that each of the actions constitutes another step in the decommissioning process underway at shoreham.
I would favor the consolidation of these three proceedings to considor the issues rained by the School District and SE,.
consolidation vould be the mont efficient and expeditious way to proceed for all concerned.
/!/k.A. 6&w ~
J n L. Bateman, M.D'.~ '
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN BEFORE ME on this /l ay of _N nwit O,
h /
mlL Notary Public My Commissj.on expires:
7 N, Uf/
eeJNtt.t%lM.m NE.~%Wy 6-
= -.
l UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING DOARD Befare Administrative Judges:
Morton B. Margulies, Chairman Dr. George A.
Ferguson Dr. Jerry R.
Kline
)
In the Matter of
)
)
Docket No. 50-322-OLA Long Island Lighting Companyt
)
Consideration of Issuance of Amendment
)
ASLDP No.
To Facility Operating License and
)
91-621-01-OLA Proposed No Significant Hazards
)
Consideration Determination and
)
opportunity for Hearing
)
(Emergency Preparedness Activities)
)
(55 Fed. Reg. 12076 March 30, 1990)
)
)
AFFIDAVIT OF EENA-MAI FRANZ Eena-Mai Franz, being duly sworn, says as follows:
1.
I, Eena-Mai Franz, reside at 25 Josephine Boulevard, Shoreham, New York 11786 which is less than two miles from the Shoreham Nuclear PoWor Station ("Shoreham Plant").
I have owned this property for thirteen years.
Thus, I live within the fifty mile geographical zone utilized by the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC") to determine whether a party is sufficiently threatened by the radjological hazard and other environmental impacts of the proposal to establish the requisite interest and standing for intervention as of right.
2.
I have been employed as a radio and nuclear chemist for the past twenty-eight years at Brookhaven National Laboratory, y-JIO212057 j
Upton, New York 11786, located about seven miles from the l
Shoreham plant.
I have spent eighteen years doing basic research in nucicar chemistry and an additional ten years in applied research in low-level nuclear vaste management.
As a nuclear chor.i s t, I am familiar with both the benefits and risks of nuclear power plants.
I strongly support the use of nuclear power to moet our nation's energy needs in a safe, economical, and environmentally benign manner.
3.
I have been a member of Scientists and Engincors for Secure Energy, Inc. ( " S E," ) sinco early in 1990.
I authorizo SE2 to represent my interests, as described heroin, in any proceedings to be hold in connection with the Long Island Lighting Company's ( " LI LCO" ) proposed license amendment adding a licenso condition which negates application of sov 11 existing licenso conditions while the reactor is in the "defueled state."
This licenso amendment, when coupled with related pending requests for permission from the NRC, would allow LILCO to cease its emergency preparedness activities altogether.
4.
I am concerned that the proposed amendment constitutes another step in the decommissioning process presently underway at Shoreham in violation of my rights under the National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA").
I do not believe that any steps in furtherance of Shoreham's decommissioning should be implemented until a Final Environmental Impact Statement ("FEIS")
cvaluating the impacts of, and alternatives to, the entire decommissioning proposal has been completed in compliance with -
l l
the terms of NEPA and the NRC's own regulations.
If the NRC allows steps which are clearly in furtherance of decommissioning, and have no necessary independent utility, to be implemented at Shoreham prior to the necessary NEPA review, my rights, and the rights of thoso similarly situated, to have an opportunity for meaningful comment on the environmental consideration of the decommissioning proposal will be prejudi-id, if not completely denied.
The proposed amendment which ef fectively allows LILCO to conses all emergency preparedness activities presupposes that decommissioning is a foregoho conclusion.
Despite the fact that NEPA maridatos maintenanco of the status ggg pending preparation of an FEIS and a final decision so that altornatives to the proposed action are not prematurely foreclosed, the proposed amendment represents a further retreat from the requirements of LILCO's full-power operating licenso prior to any environmental review of the proposed decommissioning.
5.
The proposed amendment represents a throat to my personal radiological health and safety and to my real and personal property in violation of my rights under the Atomic Eriorgy Act of 1954, as amended.
The proposed amendment is an integral part of a LILCO's attempt to cease emergency preparedness activities.
Any decrease in such activitics at a plant licensed for full-power operation increases the radiological hazard posed by the plant.
The detrimental health and safety impacts on those in close proximity to Shoreham from an accidental release of fission pruiucts would be significantly l l
.m I
I greator wore the accident to occur while Shoreham is withou', a well trained omergency response organization to stem those impacts.
6.
As a Long Island resident, I am also interested its actions which will have a direct offect on the availability of rollabic and environmentally benign electric generation to moet 4
my needs and those of my family and the community as a whole.
I understand that Long Island is presently at the full capacity of the existing natural gae pipo11nos which supply this area and that there is inadoquace reservo capacity for the growing electric energy demand of the area.
Thus, in order to avoid brownouts or blackouts, oither the Lhoreham Plant must be operated or alternativo generating facilities will have to be built and operated.
Because natu!!al gas supplies cannot easily bo-increased, oil-burning plants will inovitably be nooded to replaco the Shoreham Plant thereby increasing our reliance on foreign oil and thus reducing the security of our energy supply, among other things.
These plants, in turn, will omit pollution lowering air quality in the region and contributing to global warming and acid rain.
These offects of the Shoreham Plant's decommissioning will have detrimental effects on my health and on the quality.of the natural environment in which I live day-to-day.
In addition, Long Island ratopayors, like myself, will not only be forced to pay the costs associated with building and decommissioning Shoreham, but also the costs of building replacement oil-burning plants.
Under the terms of the " deal" 4
,, _. ~,,...
=
m
.,-y
-..m_
between Now York State and LILCO, electric rates will probably increase by 10% per year (while before the deal the rates
' increased a total of about 3% in three years).
These rate increases will load to a weakened Long Island economy and real estato market.
The businesses will have to increase their prices which I will have to pay.
Many businesses and residents are already leaving Long Island.
Those remaining will have to pay higher taxos.
Part of those tax increases will go to pay for the Long Island Power Authority, a useless agency.
This calls for serious consideration of the alternatives to decommissioning.
I personally believe that the solution would be to have the New York Power Authority operate Shoreham.
This would make rate increases unnecessary and Long Island's electric supply would be secured.
7.
And if the scope of this proceeding is narrowed to its relationship to the choice among the alternatives for decommissioning modo, I believe my health, safety and environmental interests would be harmed by any actions inconsistent with mothballing the plant ("SAFSTOR").
8.
I understand that SE has been joined by the Shoreham-2 Wading River Central School District (" School District") in socking to intervene in the hearing to be held not only on iho proposed amendment allowing the cessacion of emergency e.
preparedness activities, but also in hearings to consider the implications of the immediately offective Confirmatory order issued by the NRC on March 29, 1990 and LILCO's licenso amendment 5-
request affacting the Physical Security Plan.
I also understand that the issues raised by all of these actions significantly overlap due to the fact that each of the actions constitutes another step in the decommissioning process underway at Shoreham.
I would favor the consolidation of these three prsceedings to consider the issues raised by the School District and SE '
2 consolidation vould be the most efficient and expeditious way to procted for all concerned.
O
/tn * & C& ' h1A vPs SUBSCRIBED AllD SWOPJi BEFORE ME, on this [ day of A*Wu' kutdu Aj Notary Public s
My commission expirest [' /# ' W RUTH ANN LUT2 Neery Pubba State of New Yort, No. 53.4649130 Quellfied let Suffolk Ceum CommW Egirse September 30,19 pj 8 %
ig
.e i'
,,i 6-l
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION A10M!O SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Before Administrative Judgest Morton W. Margulies, Chairman Dr. George A. Feratuson Dr. Jerry R. Kla.no
= _ _
In the Matter at
)
}
Docket No. 50-322-01A Long Island Lighting Companyt
)
consideration of Inwuance of Amendment ASLBP No.
To racility Operating License and 91-62 3 01A Proposed No significant Hazards
)
consideration Determine. tion and opportunity f9r Hearing (Emergency Preparedness Activities)
(55 Fed. Reg. 12076 March 30, 1990)
)
AFFIDAVIT OF ANDREW P. NULL Andrew P. Hull, being duly sworn, says as followst 1.
I, Andrew P. Hull, reside at 2 Harvard Rot.d, Shoreham, New York 11786 which is just over one mile from the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station ("shoretam 181 ant").
I have owned this property for twenty-eight years.
Thus, I live within the fifty milw geographical zone utilized by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC") to determine'whether a patrty is sufficiently.
threatened by the radiological hazard and other environmental timpacts of the proposal to establish the requisite interest'and standing for intervention as of right.
2.
I have been' employed for the past twenty-eight years at Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York 11786, located
~
3az!zolis
_ - - _ -. ~ _ _ - -
U about six miles from the Shoreham plant.
I am a Health Physicist and work as a Group Leader in the Emergency Planning and Radiological Assistance Program.
I have an interest in, and have published papers concerning, the comparative risks of alternative energy sources.
As a Health Physicist, I am familiar with both the benefits and risks of nuclear power plants.
I strongly support the use of nuclear power to meet our nation's energy needs in a safe, economical, and environmentally benign manner.
3.
I have been a member of Scientists and Engineers for 1
Securo Energy, Inc. ("SE ") since 1985.
I authorize SE, to r
represent my interests, as described herein, in any proceedings to be held in connection with the Long Island Lighting Company's
("LILCo") proposed license amendment adding a license condition which negates application of several existing license conditions while the reactor is in the "defueled state."
This license amendment, when coupled with related pending requests for permission from the KRC, would allow LILCO to cease its emergency preparedness activities altog..her.
4.
I am concerned that the proposed amendment constitutos another step in the decommissioning process present1f underway at Shoreham in violation of my rights under the National l
l Environmental Policy Act ("HEPA").
I do not believe that any nteps in furtherance of Shoreham's decommissioning should be implomonted until a Final Environmental. Impact Statement ( " TEIS '-)
evaluating the impacts of, and alternatives to, the entire decommissioning proposal has been completed in compliance with !
e the terms of NEPA and the NRC's own regulations.
If the NRC allows steps which are clearly in furtherance of decommissioning, and havo no necessary independent utility, to be implemented at shoreham prior to the nocessary NEPA review, my rights, and the rights of those similarly situated, to have an opportunity for meaningful comment on the environmental considore; ion of the decommissioning proposal will be prejudiced, if not completely denied.
The proposed amendment which effectively allows LILCO to coacon all amargonny preparedness activities presupposes that decommissiening is a foregone conclusion.
Despite the fact that NEPA mandates raintenance of the status gun pending preparation of an FEIS and a final decinion so that alternatives to the proposed action are not prematurely foreclosed, the proposed amendment represents a further retreat from the requirements of LILco's ful'epower operating license prior to any environmental review of the proposed decommissf.oning.
5.
The proposed amendment represents a threat to my personal radiological health and cafety and to mi real and personal property in violation of my rights under the Atomic Energy Act cf 1954, as amended.
The proposed amendment is an integral part of a LILCo's attempt to cease emergency preparodnonn activities.
Any decrease in such activition at a plant licensed for full-power operation increases the radiological hazard posed by the plant.
The detrimental health and safety impacts on those in close proximity to Shortham from an accidental release of fistion products would be significantly l
1g greater were the uccident to oocur while shoreham is without a well-trained emergency response organization to stem those
- impacts.
6.
As a Long Island resident, I an interested in actions which will have a dircet effect on the availability of reliable electricity to
- 4t my needs and those of my family and the community an a whole.
I understand that Long Is1cnd is presently at the full capacity of the existing natural gas p3pelines which cupply this area and that thoto is inadequato reserve capacity for the growing electric 6nergy demands of the area.
- Thus, oither Shoreham must be opereted or alternative generating facilities will have to be built t.nd operated.
Because natural gan supplies cannot easily be increased, oil-burning plants will inevitably be needed to replace Shoreham.
These p1 Ants, in turn, will emit pollution Iowaring air quality in the region and contributing to: global warming and acid rait..
These effects of Shoreham's decommission'.ng will'have detrimental effects on ny health and on the quality of the natural onvironment in which I 1.: co-day-to-day.
This calls for seri,..is consideration of the alternativos to decommissioning.
7.
And if the scope of this proceeding is narrowet to its reletionship to the choice among the alternatives for decommissioning modo, I believe my health, safety and environmental' interests would be harmed by any actions inconsistent with mothballing the plant ("SATSTOR"). i
_..~. _. _.
JAN 3191 15i51 JROM D_. L ', A, IJASHINGTON DC PAGE.012-
- w. -
has been joined by the (..t<teham-8.
I understand that'8Eg
-Wading River central School District _(# school District") in seeking to intervene in the hearing to be held not only on the proposed amendment allowing the cessation of emergency preparedness activities,.but also in hearings to consider the irap11 cations of the immediately offactive confirmatory order issued by the NRC on March 29, 1990 and LILco's license amendment request affecting the Physical Security Plan.
I also understand that-the issues raised by all'of these actions significantly overlap due to the fact that each of the actions constitutes another step in the decommissioning process underway at shoreham.
~
I'would favor the consolidation of these three proceedings to consider-the-issues raised by the school District and SE '
a Consolidation would be the moet efficient and' expeditious way to proceed for all-concerned.
b A
Andred P.-Hull-on this' 3/ day of Ow,
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN.BEFORE.ME,
/
./
.1991.
%~
- N,_e%
Notary Public-My Commission expires: F 7e W
. SUSAN T.CARLSEN Notary Putdo Susoe County N.Y. <
4464226 August $1,1 L
<1
+
v' o5w s-l.e,-.
-<a w~
+
-.A.
v.+-
.w-o-
=.x b-UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAPETY AND LICENSING BOARD Before Administrative Judges:
Morton B. Margulies, Chairman Dr. George A. Ferguson Dr. Jerry R. Klino
)
In the Matter of
)
)
Docket No. 30-322-OLA Long Island Lighting Company:
)
Consideration of. Issuance of Amendment
).ASLBP Ho.
. To-Facility-Operating License-and
)
91-621-01-OLA Proposed No Significant Hazards
)
Consideration Determination and
)
Opportunity for Hearing
)
(Emergency Preparedness Activition)
)
(55iTed. Reg. 12076 March 30, 1990)
)
)
AFFIDAVIT OF STEPHEN V. MUSOLINO, Ph.D.
Stephen v. Mucolino, Ph.D., being duly sworn, says as follows:
1.
'I,. Stephen V. Musolino,. reside at 6 Middle Cross, Shoreham, New York 11766 which is about two miles from the 1
l Shoreham Nuclear Power Station ("Shoreham Plant").
I have owned l
-this property'for'fivo years.
Thus, I live within the fifty mile I
geographical zone. utilized by the U.S. Nuclear. Regulatory ll L
commission' ("NRC") - to determine -.whether a party -is sufficiently e
I
- threatened'by the radiological hazard 1and other environmental-impacts of the proposal'to establish the requisite interest and l[
otanding:for intervention as of right.
p
- 2.
I have been employed-for the past twelve years at Drookhaven National Laboratory,1Upton, New York 11786, located
/
about-five miles-from the Shoreham plant.
For the past nine
. years, I have worked as a Health Physicist.
I am Assistant for Safety to the Project Head of the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider Project, including radiation, industrial, industrial hygeine, and cryogenic safety.
I am also a-member of the Brookhaven Emergency Planning Staff.
I earned my BSET at Buffalo State, my Masterc in Nucicar Engineering at Polytechnic Institute of New York, and my Ph.D. In Health Physics at Georgia Institute of Technology.
I am past President of the New York Chapter of the Health Physics Society. -Through both my training and work experience, I am familiar with both the benefits and risks of nuclear power plants.
I strongly support the use of nuclear power to meet our nation's energy noods an a safe, economical, and environmentally benign manner.
3 I have been a-member of Scientists.ane Engineers for Secure Energy, Inc. ( " S E," ) since' January 3, 1989.
1 authorize
-SE to-represent my interests, as described herein, in any 2
proceedings to'be held in connection with the Long Island ic LLighting Company's ("LILCO") proposed license-amendment adding a.
license condition which negates application of several existing:
license: conditions while the reactor istin the "defueled, state."
.This license amondmor.t, whenLeoupled with related_pending
. requests:-for-permission from the NRC, would-allow.LILCO to cease its emergency preparedness activities altogether, t
a w
.. ~.
. - - _ ~
i I
4.
I am: concerned that the proposed amendment constitutes another step in the docommissioning process presently underway at Shoreham in violation of my rights under the National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA").
I do not believe that any steps in furtherance of Shorcham's decommissioning should be implemented until a rinal Environmental Impact Statement ("FEIS")
t evaluating the impacts of, and alternatives to, the entire decommincioning proposal has been completed in compliance with the terms of NEPA and the NRC's own regulations.
If the NRC allows steps which are cicarly in furthorance of decommissioning, and have no necessary independent utility, to be implemented at Shoreham prior to the necessary NEPA review, my rights, and the rights of those similarly situated, to have an opportunity for meaningful comment on the environmental consideration of the
-decommissioning propnaal will bo prejudiced, if not completely denied.
The proposed amendment which effectively allows LILCO to ceases all emergency preparedness activities presupposes that
. decommissioning is a foregone conclusion.
Despite the fact that T
NEPA mandates' maintenance of the otatus:gus pending-preparation of an FEIS and a final docinion so that: alternatives to the proposed actior; are not prematurely foreclosed, the proposed amendment represents a further retreat from-the requirements of LILeo's full power operating license -prior -to any environmental review of-tho. proposed' decommissioning.
contributing to global warming and acid rain.
These effects of Shorcham's decomminoloning will have detrimental effects on my health and on the quality of the natural environment in which I live day-to-day.
This calla for norious consideration of the alternatives to decommissioning.
7.
And if the scopo of this proceeding is narrowed to its relationship to the choice among the altornatives for decommissioning modc, I believe my health, safety and environmontal interests would be harmed by any actions inconsistent With mothballing the plant ("SAFSTOR").
D.
I anderstand that SE has been joined by the Shoreham-2 Wading River Central School District (" School District") in aceking to intervono in the hearing to be held not only on the proposed amendment allowing the cessation of emergency preparednonc activities, but also in hearings to considor the implications of the immediately effective Confirmatory Order l
issued by the NRC on March 29, 1990 and LILCO's liconne amendmont request affecting the Physical Security plan.
I also understand that the issues raised by all of those actions significantly overlap due to the fact that cach of the actions constitutos l
another step in the decomminnioning process underway 'at Shoreham.
1 I would favor the consolidation of these throo proccodings to connider the iccuos raised by the School Di.trict and SE '
2
-5 l
5.
Thn pregocod amondmont represents a threat to my personal radiological-health and safoty and to my real and personal property in violation of my rights under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.
The proposed amendment is an integral part of a LILco's attempt to coano cuorgency preparednoon activitios.
Any decrease in such activities at a plant-licensed for full-power operation increases the radiological hazard posed by the plant.
The dotrimental health and safety impacto on thoso in close proximity to Shoreham from an accidental release of fission products would be significantly greater'were the-accident to occur while shoreh:2 is without a well-trainod omergercy response orga.9ication to stem thoso impacts.
6.
An a Long Island resident, I am interested in actions which willLhave a direct offect on the availability of reliable electricity to moot my needs and those of my family and the community as a whole.
I understand that Long Island is presently at the full capacity of the existing natural gas pipelines which p
supply this area and that-there is inadequate reserve capacity L
for the growing-cloctric energy demands of the area.
- Thus, Leither Shoreham must be operated or-alternativre generating L
facilities-will_have to bo built and operated.
Because natural gas eupplica cannot easily ba increased, oli-burning. plants will inevitably be needed to replace Shoreham, These plsnts, in turn, will cuit pollution lowering air quality in the region an'.
1 ;
1 i
I
.-n
' c, < ;
- a
- ' 5 Fren D.t.A.
.i' A m i n r
- e > t. cr $
consolidation would be t.ho meat officient and expoditious way to proceed for a)) concerned.
+. ~.
f Stephen V. Musolino, Ph.D.
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN BEFORE ME, on this 8/
day of dh>PM'fe/
, /fM 1991.
'h f /ff
/
t.a-f]., vc & y,w ;,s.a:.~? <L Notary Ptblic My commission expiros N. t'I /$$d DONME3 3Hg
% %,em.gM0
&m 4e44eos 00
.e N.m
&QQf?...
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAyETY AND LICENSING BOARD Before ' Administrative Judge:
Morton B. Margulies, Chairman Dr. George A. Ferguson Dr. Jerry R. Kline
)
In the Matter of
)
)
Docket NO. 5 0-4 ? 2 -OLA Long Island Lighting company:
)
Cpnoldoratien of Issuance of Amendment
)
ASLDP No.
To Facility Operating License and
)
91-621-01-OLA Proposed No Significant Hazards
)
Consideration Determination and
)
Opportunity for Hearing
)
(Emergency Preparedness Activities)
)
(55 Fed. Reg. 12076 March 30, 1990)
)
_)
AFFIDAVIT OF JOSEPH SCRANDIS Joseph Scrandis, being duly sworn, says as follows:
1.
I, Joseph Scrandis, have owned my preser.t residence at 10 Walnut Street, Westbury, New York 11590 for twenty-two years, located somo 43 miles-from the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station
("Shoreham Plant").
Thus, I live within the fifty mile geographical zone utilized by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("KRC") to determino whether a party is sufficiently threatened by the radiological hazard and other environmontal impacts'of the-proposal to establish the requisite interest and 1
standing for intervention as of right.
../
- 4 2.
I have been employed for the past five years at Aikido
' Computer-Systems,-Ltd., 150 Broad Hollow Road, Melville, New York 11747,. located thirty miles from Shoreham.
My-job titles are Director of Maintenance and Installations, and computer Systems
- Engineer,
-I am' responsible for developing new computer systems, the duties of a chief Mechanical Engineer and Senior Electricai Engineer, and maintaining several computer systems for public service.agencien.
I hold d6grees in Electrical Engineering and Physics,-and'have been.an active proponent of science and technology for 30-years via personal efforts and debate, letters to the editor, and organizational affiliations.
I am fcmiliar.
with both the benefits and riske of nuclear power plante and strongly support the use of nuclear power to meet our nation's energy needs in a safe, economical, and er.<ironmentally -benign manner.
. 3~
I have been a member of Scientists and Engineers for Secure Energy, Inc; ("SE ") since before 1980.
I authorize SE 2
g to represent my interests,:as described herein, in any-
- proceedings to be held in connection with-the Long Island i
-L ghting company's -("LItco") proposed license amendment adding a license' condition which negates application of coveral existing license conditions while the reactor is in the "defueled state."
- Thisl license amendment, when coupled-with related pending requests for permission ? from the. NRC,- would ' allcw LILCO to cease-its omergency preparodness activities altogether.
e e
i 4
L
-,e--
r e
r,s--r-w e
e
,s--
-, - ~ -
e eu-
+
4.
I am concerned that the proposed amendment ccnstitutes
- another-step in the decommissioning process presently t:nderway at shoreham in violation of my rights under the National Environmental Policy Act ("REPA").
I do not believe tr,at any stops in furtherance of shoreham's decommissioning should be implemented until a Final Environmental Impact StatemcT46 ("FEIS")
evaluating the impacts of, and alternatives to, the entire decommissioning proposal has been completed in compliance with the terms of NEPA and the NRC's own regulations.
If tr.e NRC allows steps which are clearly in furtherance of decomr.issioning, and.havn.no necessary independent utility, to be imp 3atented at Shoreham prior to the necessary NEPA review, my rights, and the rights of those similarly situated, to have an opportunity for meaningful comment on the environmental consideration cf the docommissioning-proposal will be prejudiced, if not conplately denied.
The proposed amendment which effectively allows LILCO to ceases all emergency preparedness activitics presupposos that decommissioning is a forogone conclusion. 'Despite the fact that HEPA mandates maintenance of the s.tatus gun pending proparation' of an TEI3 and a final decision so that alternatives to the proposed action are not prematurely foreclosed, the proposed amendnent represents a further retreat from the requiroments of
. LILco's full-power operating licenso prior to any e'nvironmental review of the proposed decommissioning.
l 1 l
w
-p 4
+ - - +
5.
The proposed amendment represents a threat to my personal radiological health and safety and to my real and personal property in violation of my rights under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.
The proposed amendment is an integral part of a LILco's attempt to cease emorgoney preparedncan activition.
Any decrease in such activities at a plant 1 consod for full-povor operation increases the radiologjcal hazard posed by the plant.
The detrimental health and safety impacts on those in closo proximity to Shoreham from an accidental release of fission products would be significantly greater were the accident to occur while Shoreham is without a
voll-trained omergency responso organization to stem those imptets.
6.
As a Long Island resident, I am also intarested in actions which will have a direct effect on the availakility of reliable, inexicosive, and environmentally benign elec tric generation to meet my needs and those of my family and the community an a whole.
AP for reliability, it has been my observation that the gan)tcy of cloctricity supply han seriously degraded on Long Island over the last five years.
Tho office in which I work has recently suffered several brovnouts und outages during times of peat electricity usago, porviously those occurrences were quito rare, occuring at a rate of an incident ovary few years.
Although this prob 1cm in ondemic to the section of Long Island where I live and work, it is not limited to it. _____
'Y
Boing responsible for numerous computer systems in the New York City area has made an aware that the whole region is dergerously close to being caught without sufficient electrical power reserves.
As a computer elgineer, I can testify that these power outages, brownouts and sags can vreak havoc with the continuous and proper operation of computer systams. They have dauaged and intorrupted computers and can leave them in a chaotic state requiring (brute forco) power rosots which may result in a loss of data or a more serious loss of control.
These conditions are damaging to the economic voll being of the people of I4ng Island and would be greatly alloviated by the operation of the Shoreham plant.
As for the consequences of Shoreham's decommissioning on the physical environment, I understand that Long Island is presently at the full capacity of the existing natural gas pipelines which supply this area and that there is inadequate rer.rve capacity for the growing electric energy demand of the area.
Thus, either the Shoraham plant must be operated or alternative generatin, facilities will have to be built and operated.
Becauso natural gas supplies cannot easily to increased, oil-burning plants will inevitably be needed to replace the Shoraham plant thereby increasing our reliance on foreign oil and thus reducing the security of our energy supply, among other things.
These plants, in turn, will emit pollution i
i lowering air quality in the region and contributing to global warming and acid rain.
These effects cf the Shoreham Flant's dccommissior.ing will have detrimental effects on my hecith and on
-S-l j
h
the quality of the natural environment in which I live day-to-day.
Finally, as for the economic implications of Shoreham's decommissioning, by acceding to the would-bo dismantlers of the Shoraham plant, the NRC is wreaking havoc upon the economic well-being of Long Island and, in turn, upon myself.
The huge debt incurred in the construction of Shoreham will fall upon the residente and consumers of electricity on Long Island.
Just as we are involved in the burden of servicing the debt, so will we have to pay it off, and suffer the indignity of not being able to reap any of the benefits of its use through the generat. ion of mich nooded electricity.
Purther, besides suffering the consequences of electricity shortage ti..n Shorcham's non-use shall create, we residents will have to further pay for the construction of new power plants to replace Shoreham's electricity.
Tnis will throttle normal. growth and expan. ion, and will make any normal every-day. operations involving i' actricity sporadic and problematic.
The value of my home and those of my-neighbors will plummet. ify property on Long Island will be likened to that of many third world countries: 1111guid, devalued and very difficult to sell, radically different from the rest of the United States.
All of thesa negative effects of the
' decommissioning proposal emphasize the need for serious consideration of the alternativer to decommissioning.
i
'7.
And if the scope of.this proceeding is narrowod to=its
-relationship to-the choice ~among the alternatives.for
--6 p
m.n.
mmm neren DC PAGE. csis
~ decommissioning-modes, I believe my health, safety and onvironmontal interests would be harmed by any actions inconsistent with mothballing the plant ("SAFSTOR"),
8.
I understand that SE f
han been joined by the Shoreham-2 Wading River Central School District (" School District") in cooking to intervene in the hearing to be held not only on the proposed amendment allouing the cessation of emergency preparodnosa activities, but also in hearings to considor the implications of the intodiately offectivo Confirmatory order innued by..the NRC oa March 29, 1990 and LILCO's license amendment request affecting the Physical Security Plan.
I c3si und.crstand that the issues raised by all of these actions significantly overlap due to the fact that each ef. the actions constitt tes another stop in the decommissioning process underway at shoreham.
I would-favor the consolidation of these three proceedings to consider the issues raised by the School District and SE '
2 consolidation would be the most efficient and expeditious way to proceed for-all concerned, h>% 0
^6w0
\\
o u
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN BEFORE ME, on this - IN day of E b/ N Mh, 1991.:
,/]
h m - f - //,
i W k u h
./
s Notary Public v
My Commission expires:
/M/ /
'h /'V M N T E M SE #
Strte of New Yo$
- Notary PeM:'/. Sucolh County,
N u 84283 ComfnisEn Spfts '/t/[.195 6
yg
-.g-,----,1
,e wT r