ML20148D404
| ML20148D404 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 01/19/1988 |
| From: | Palomino F NEW YORK, STATE OF |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20148D035 | List: |
| References | |
| OL-3, NUDOCS 8801250385 | |
| Download: ML20148D404 (10) | |
Text
. _ _.
d s
January 18, 1988 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION-Before the Atomic Safety and Licensina Board
)
In the Matter of
)
)
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-322-OL-3
)
(Emergency Planning)
(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station,
)
Unit 1)
)
)
AFFIDAVIT OF FABIAN G.
PALOMINO Fabian G. Palomino, being duly sworn, does state under oath j
as follows:
1.
I am Special Counsel to the Governor of New York.
I have held this position since 1983.
In this position, one of my
(
duties has been to advise the Governor on matters relating to the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station and to serve as principal counsel representing the State of New York in these matters.
2.
With respect to LILCO's Motion for Summary Disposition dated December 18, 1987, related to 10 CFR S 50.47(c)(1)(i) and (ii), LILCO asserts that it has made a "sustained, good faith 8801250385 890119 gDR ADOCK 05000322 PDR
/',.
- )
effort to secure and retain the participation" of the New Yor'.
State government in emergency planning for Shoreham.
I disagree.
In my opinion, LILCO's actions do not represent a good faith effort, and certainly not a "sustained, good faith effort," to obtain the participation of the State government.
3.
With respect to the State of New York, I stress at the outset that LILCO's "evidence" of an alleged sustained good faith effort during the Cuomo administration is so limited in both quality and quantity as to be inadequate on its face.
LILCO cites three events that are alleged by LILCO to show a sustained good faith effort to secure and retain the State's participation during the Cuomo administration:
representations LILCO made in 1983 before a special fact-finding panel appointed by the Governor to investigate emergency planning, safety, and economic matters related to Shoreham; LILCO's transmittal of a letter to the Governor in 1983 largely seeking relief from economic 4
concerns; and an effort of L.tLCO in 1987 to attend one meeting convened by the utilities constituting the New York Dower Pcol.1/
l 1/
In 1982, Governor Cuomo was not Governor and I had no direct or official involvement in matters related to Shoreham.
In early 1983, I became actively involved in Shoreham-related matters, particularly related to Suffolk County's planning efforts in 1982 and LILCO's response thereto.
I became aware that during 1982, contrary to the wishes of Suffolk County -- and without the County's knowledge or authorization --LILCO transmitted to the j
New York State Disaster Preparedness Commission a document which l
LILCO purported to be the emergency plan of Suffolk County.
In fact, the document was not the emergency plan of Suffolk County l
and parts of the document had actually been discarded by Suffolk County as inadequate materials.
LILCO's actions during 1982 did l
not represent any effort by LILCO to secure the participation of (f.,otnote continued) -
q I submit that even if LILCO's assertions about the meaning of these matters were accurate (and they are not), the paucity of LILCO's efforts related to the State, as shown on the face of the Motion, requires the conclusion that LILCO's efforts did not manifest "good faith," and surely not "sustained, good faith," in the context of the remainder of LILCO's conduct during the period that LILCO's Motion covers.
4.
During 1983, after the commencement of the Cuomo administration, the major New York State involvement relating to Shoreham was the work of the Special Fact Finding Commission empaneled by Governor Cuomo (the so-called "Marburger Commission" named after Dr. John Marburger, the President of the State University of New York at Stony Brook).
The purpose of the Marburger Commission was to address particular questions related to emergency planning, safety, and economics at Shoreham.
5.
On several occasions, LILCO made presentations to the Marburger Commission concerning emergency planning for Shoreham.
Those presentacions were attempts to persuade that Commission --
i f
(footnote continued from previous page) the New York State government in offsite emergency planning for Shoreham.
Rather, the actions sought to prompt the New York State government to override the decisions which had been made by the Suffolk County government in its capacity as a local municipality.
Accordingly, the actions described by LILCO in its Motion (agg p. 8) related to the New York State government in p
j 1982 were not actions designed to secure or retain the New York State government's participation in emergency planning for Shoreham.
1 i
and Governor Cuomo through that Commission -- that the analyses of Suffolk County were unsound.
6.
I am aware that LILCO has attached to its Summary Disposition Motion (Attachment 4) a December 14, 1983, letter from LILCO's Board Chairman to Governor Cuomo.
It was written a few days before the Marburger Commission Report was submitted to Governor Cuomo and seeks to persuade the Governor that Shoreham should be permitted to operate.
Read in its totality, the letter is not an effort to persuade New York State to participate in emergency planning for Shoreham.
Rather, a full reading of the letter shows that it is devoted almost totally to the allegedly adverse economic consequences to Long Island ratepayers, busines-ses, and, most importantly, to LILCO, if Shoreham were not permitted to operate.
It thus represents a continuation of LILCO's actions to attempt to get Shoreham on-line because of LILCO's own self-interests, not because a safe evacuation of Long Island citizens would be possible in a nuclear accident.
7.
Following that LILCO letter in late 1983, I recall no instance when LILCO made any effort to secure New York State's participation in emergency planning for Shoreham.1/
To the l
1/
It is absurd for LILCO to suggest (Motion at 13) that its l
attempted attendance at a New York Power Pool meeting in May 1987 was part of an effort to secure New York participation in planning for Shoreham.
The New York Power Pool is an organizatiori of utilities in New York.
That meeting was unrelated to Shoreham, and thus even if the LILCO person had attended, it would not have been pertinent to securing New York (footnote continued)
-4 1
1
7 contrary, in early 1984, LILCO's Board Chairman held discussions with the Governor for the purpose of discussing the abandonment of Shoreham in return for requested tax benefits.
Thus, the focus of seeking any State help was not on securing participation in emergency planning.
These discussions did not succeed, however.
8.
Beginning shortly thereafter, LILCO began a continuous effort in opposition to New York State's interests.
There was not any effort by LILCO to secure the State's participation in emergency planning for Shoreham.
Accordingly, there is no basis t
upon which this Board could base a determination that LILCO has made a sustained good faith effort to secure New York State's j
participation in emergency planning.
LILCO has made no such effort at all.
9.
To the contrary, LILCO has made repeated misrepresenta-tions about the policy and position of New York State.
In late December 1983, in a four-page press statement in which i
Governor Cuomo called for abandonment of the Shoreham plant, he commented that if there were a serious accident at Shoreham, the State would do its best to assist.
LILCO took that statement which was issued to explain why the Governor opposed the opera-(footnote continued from previous page)
State's participation in emergency planning for Shoreham.
The LILCO representative was denied admittance to the meeting because the meeting was for persons involved in operating plants.
Shoreham is not operating for offsite planning purposes and thus it was inappropriate for any LILCO representative to be present.
I i <
. =.
a tion of Shoreham -- and for several years misrepresented it before the NRC and other federal agencies.
Governor Cuomo repeatedly called upon LILCO to stop these misrepresentations, but nonetheless LILCO continued, forcing the Governor to take the extraordinary step in late June 1986 of rescinding the press statement.
10.
I am also aware that during 1984 and 1985, LILCO made repeated endeavors, particularly in Washington, D.C.,
to persuade 2
the federal government to intercede in the Shoreham proceeding and in some way to supercede State and local government authori-ties for emergency planning around the Shoreham plant.
In fact, documents released from the federal government indicate that at least at one time, there was consideration'of a Presidential Executive Order which would have directed (albeit illegally in my opinion) that federal government authorities be utilized in lieu of State and local government authorities for emergency planning around commercial nuclear plants.
Upon information and belief, I believe that LILCO, acting through its agents and counsel, had a i
material role in such activities before the federal government.
These were activities designed not to secure the participation of New York State in emergency planning for Shoreham, but were l
designed to obviate the need to secure such participation.
l I
l i
l i
I
i g
11.
In conclusion, it is my opinion that LILCO has made no sustained good faith effort to secure the participation og New York State in emergency planning for Shoreham Subscribed to before me this __ /./.5 J
_ day of January 1988.
_s
-.L Fn6 an G. Palomino My Cocimission expires:
_ ///30ffd' idate)
RICHARD J. ZAHNLEUTER Y Y ?$$:,$aMjb a.CunN Quak e,,~ e Wl Qygg (ggp (Notary PtTD1tc) t l
l t
l l
l l
l l
t
t
'o 000NE;ED t
January 18, 19kkFC l
18 JW 22 P2 :33 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION IICE cf Mcqap XIIj'
- EiiVICl, Before the Atomic Safety and Licensina Boar
)
In the Matter of
)
)
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-322-OL-3
)
(Emergency Planning)
(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station,
)
Unit 1)
)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of Suffolk County, State of New York, and Town of Southampton Response in Opposition to LILCO's Motion for Summary Disposition of Contentions 1-10 With Respect to 10 CFR S 50.47(c)(1)(i) and (ii) have been served on the following this 19th day of January 1988 by U.S. mail, first class.
James P. Gleason, Chairman Mr. Frederick J.
Shon Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 513 Gilmoure Drive U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Silver Spring, Maryland 20901 Washington, D.C.
20555 Dr. Jerry R. Kline William R. Cumming, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Spence W. Perry, Esq.
U. f,. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of General Counsel Washington, D.C.
20555 Federal Emergency Management Agency 500 C Street, S.W.,
Room 840 Washington, D.C.
20472 a
l I
I i
Fabian G.
Palomino, Esq.
W. Taylor Reveley, III, Esq.
Richard J.
Zahleuter, Esq.
Hunton & Williams Special Counsel to the Governor P.O.
Box 1535 Executive Chamber, Rm. 229 707 East Main Street State Capitol Richmond, Virginia 23212 Albany, New York 12224 Joel Blau, Esq.
Anthony F. Earley, Jr.,
Esq.
Director, Utility Intervention General Counsel N.Y. Consumer Protection Board Long Island Lighting Company Suite 1020 175 East Old Country Road Albany, New York 12210 Hicksville, New York 11801 E. Thomas Boyle, Esq.
Ms. Elisabeth Taibbi, Clerk Suffolk County Attorney Suffolk County Legislature Bldg. 158 North County Complex Suffolk County Legislature Veterans Memorial Highway Office Building Hauppauge, New York 11788 Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, New York 11788 Mr. L.
F.
Britt Stephen B.
Latham, Esq.
Long Island Lighting Company Twomey, Latham & Shea Shoreham Nuclear Power Station 33 West Second Street North Country Road Riverhead, New York 11901 Wading River, New York 11792 Ms. Nora Bredes Docketing and Service Section i
Executive Director Office of the Secretary I
Shoreham Opponents Coalition U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.
195 East Main Street 1717 H Street, N.W.
Smithtown, New York 11787 Washington, D.C.
20555 i
Alfred L.
Nardelli, Esq.
Hon. Patrick G. Halpin Assistant Attorney General Suffolk County Executive New York State Department of Law H. Lee Dennison Building 120 Broadway Veterans Memorial Highway t
Room 3-118 Hauppauge, New York 11788
+
1 MHB Technical Associates Dr. Monroe Schneider i
1723 Hamilton Avenue North Shore Committee j
Suite K P.O.
Box 231 San Jose, California 95125 Wading River, New York 11792 Mr. Jay Dunkleburger Edwin J. Reis, Esq.
j New York State Energy Office George E. Johnson, Esq.
Agency Building 2 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.
Empire State Plaza Office of General Counsel Albany, New York 12223 Washington, D.C.
20555 l
l
i David A.
Brownlee, Esq.
Mr. Stuart Diamond Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Business / Financial 1500 Oliver Building NEW YORK TIMES Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222 229 W.
43rd Street New York, New York 10036 Douglas J. Hynes, Councilman Mr. Philip McIntire Town Board of Oyster Bay Federal Emergency Management Town Hall Agency Oyster Bay, New York 11771 26 Federal Plaza New York, New York 10278 M
Wawrence Coe Lanphet KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART 1800 M Street, N.W.
South Lobby - 9th Floor Washington, D.C.
20036-5891 1
I l
i 1
i l
I i
l l
1
--