ML20198E208

Discusses Onsite Disposal of Radwaste,Per . Silberg Stated That Should Not Be Included in Hearing File Since Author Does Not Meet Formal Legal Requirements.Served on 860522

ML20198E208
Person / Time
Site:	Davis Besse
Issue date:	05/19/1986
From:	Bimber R AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To:	Hoyt H Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
CON-#286-245 ML, TAC-60875, NUDOCS 8605270312
Download: ML20198E208 (3)

Text

m __

C)

• !s,

/ "

9-hQb M, y g19Y -

RUSSELL M. BIMBER, k, 10471 PROUTY ROAD PAINESVILLE, OHID 44077 h poc'CEMg

.Q EEh..i<G N' g Phone: (216) 357 3137 M-F 8-5, other A/>~

( eg] 3 {/ 'l 0 Helen Hoyt, Esquire May 19, 1986 Administrative Judge Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Panel, EW-439 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission gRVED MAYdRW Washington, D. C. 20555 Re Davis-Besse Onsite Radwaste Disposal, Docket 50-346-ML Dear Judge Hoyt You have not acknowledged my letter of April 5th, possibly because you were waiting f or my response to Mr. Silberg's letter of April 18th. He said my letter of April 5th should not be included in the Hearing File, because I live too far from Davis-Besse, and had not met the formal legal requirements.

He did not challenge my statement that I, or one of my family members, may die from radioactive pollution from Davis-Besse in our drinking water. In addition to my drinking water coming'from Lake Erie, via the Painesville City water system, this water is also used on my home vegetable garden (about thirty by sixty-five feet) and on rhubarb, spearmint. blueberries, grapes, and apple, cherry, and nut trees in my backyard. My family eats fish at least once a week, and many of them come from Lake Erie. Approval of the radwaste site would increase radioactive contamination of our food. Could there possibly be any greater reason for allowing me in the hearing? Mr.Silberg"s comments on my acknowledgement that 8.5 millicuries is small, relative to other emissions from Davis-Besse, implies he might defend the last man involved in a gang rape as being less guilty than preceding ones! I disagree.

Approval of Toledo Edison's request, including release of the land for unrestricted use, has significant impacts extending for many decades. It seems improper to_ ban anyone from your hearing based on their present residence. Where they or their descendants might live some 30 to 75 years from now seems more pertinent.

Davis-Besse is centrally located between my present home and those of my children in St. Louis, MO and Traverse City, MI. I do not want some of my descendants (or anyone else) to be injured or killed by radioactivity from, or the possible flammability of, Davis-Desse's ion exchange resins. (Ian exchange resins are usually modified polystyrenes, so would be expected to present a severe fire hazard -- approaching that of two million gallons of fuel oil in this case, unless shown otherwise: but flammability and ease of erosion, etc., may be beyond the jurisdiction of NRC).

Generations yet unborn cannot possibly speak at your hearing; I want to pass on a more liveable world to them.

8605270312 860519 DR ADOCK05000g6 0 '][)g,()(3

m O

The question of release of the possible waste disposal site for other use may come under the jurisdiction of EPA instead of NRC:

see 51FR14550, item 2690 (April 21, 1986).

I cannot afford the legal representation that might be needed to comply with all the fine points of NRC requirements, partly because I share the burden of paying for some of the 150-plus lawyers on some Shaw et al letterheads, who represent my electric company against me in this matter. (Many of them put PC or PC JR after their names; if anyone cares, I'm writing this on a SANYO!)

If I must attend your hearing to have my letter (s?) included in the Hearing File, I would like to know as soon as possible when and where they are to be. I expect that I would have to arrange several days away from work.

Sincerely, gd 70),

Russell M. Bimber cc: Charles Darth, Esquire Docketing L.ServiceBranch(3)

Jay E. Silberg, PC