ML20067C574: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 17: Line 17:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:}}
{{#Wiki_filter:.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLF.AR REGUIATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Before Administrative Judges:
Morton B. Margulies, Chairman Dr. George A. Ferguson Dr. Jerry R. Eline
)
In the Matter of
)
Docket No. 50-322-0IA
)
Long Island Lighting Co.,
)
ASLBp No. 91-621-01-oIA Shoreham Nuclear Power Station;
)
Confirmatory order Modifying
)
License (Effactive Immediately)
)
(55 Fed. Reg. 12758, April 5, 1990)
AFFIDAVIT OF STEPREN V. MUSOLINO, Ph.D.
Stophon V. Mucolino, Ph.D., being duly sworn, says as follows:
1.
I, Stephen v. Musolino, reside at 6 Middle Cross, Shoreham, New York 11786 which is about two miles from the shoreham Nuclear Power Station ("Shoreham Plant").
I have ovnod this property for five 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 establich the requisite interest and standing for intervention as of right.
2.
I-have been employed for the past twelve years at Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York 11786, located about five miles from the Shoreham plant.
For the past nine 910212011e 910204 i
ADOCK050g2 l
DR
 
years, I have worked as a Health Physicist.
I am Assistant for safety to the Project Head of the Reintivistic 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 Masters in Nuclear 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 needs in a safe, economical, and environmentally benign manner.
3.
I have been a member of Scientists and Engineers for Secure Energy, Inc. ( " S E," ) since January 3, 1989.
I authorize SE, to represent my interests, as described herein, in any proceedings to be held in connection with the Immediately Effective Confirmatory Order, issued by the NRC on March 29, 1990, prohibiting the Long Island Lighting Company ("LILC0"),
licensee of the Shoreham plant from placing fuel into the reactor vessel without prior NRC approval.
4.
I am concerned that the confirmatory order constitutes another step in the decommissioning process presently underway at.
 
]
l l
Shoreham in violation of ny rights under the National q
Environmental Policy Act (*NEPA").
The order reaffirms the previous NRC decisions alloVing LILCO to reduce staffing and 1
maintenance to a level clearly inconsistent with the terms of the i
full power operating license and several NRC regulations.
These very actions which the NRC explicitly allowed are now being advanced as presenting a health and safety threat of such a magnitude that an immediately effective order was issued to effectively prohibit operation.
SE, submitted a section 2.206 request in conjunction with the Shorehan-Wading River Central School District in July of 1989 when the destaffing and plant disassembly activition had only just been announced and'were yet to be inplemented.
The Request asserted that these actions should not be allowed to go forward before publication of a Final Environnental Inpact Statement ("rEIS") pursuant to the dictates of NEPA and because they were inimical to the public health and safety due to their inconsistecy with LILco's license obligations as a full-power licensee.
Despite the fact that the commission denied the request for immediato relief and continues to ignore the issues raised in the original Section 2.206 request and the supplements thereto, it now relies on the results of the challenged actions to justify issuance of the immediately effective order without ordering remedial measures or proposing l
fines.
3 i
l
 
5, 1 do not believe that any steps in furthorance of the Shoreham Plant's decommissioning should be implemented until a TEIS 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 in a single proceeding.
If the NRC allows steps Which are clearly in
- furtherance of decommissioning, and have no necessary independent utility, to be implemented at the Shoreham Plant prior to the necessary NEPA review, my rights, and the rights of those similarly situated, to have an opportunity to* meaningful comment i
on the environmental consideration of the decommissioning proposal will be prejudiced, if not completely denied. ' Besides 1
reaffirming past actions aimed at removing the shoreham Plant from service and, therefore, in furtherance of decomLissioning, the Confirmatory order also sets the stage for yet other actions in furtherance of decommissioning.
LILCO has applied for a license amendment to recognize the defueled state of the plant which will in turn facilitate the transfer of the plant to the Long Island Power Authority.
The Confirmatory order, which prohibits operation of the plant, is a first link in a chain of actions directed towards the issuance of a liconte amendment authorizing " possession and uso, but not operation."
The issuance of a possession only license would be, in turn, a further step in removing the plant from service which is the first part of "docommissioning" as defined by the NRC regulations. 4 7--
__.-...., ~..,,. _..
..._,,._,_-,,.,,-,...m,
,,...., - _. _,, -. _. _ ~. -, _ -,
~
 
j i
1 6.
The Confirmatory Order miso represents a threat to my personal radiological health and safety and to my real and s
personal property in violation of my rights under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.
In direct violation of its evn stated enforcement policy, the NRC has failed, in that Order, to require LILeo to undertake remedial actions to bring the Shoreham Plant into compliance with the terms cf its full-power operating license.
Thus, should a determination later be made to operate the shoreham Plant, deterioration allowed by LILCO and-by that
. incomplete order will at the least move operation further away in time, and at the worst, increase the likelihood and risk of a.
radiological accident, i
7.
As a Long Island resident, I am also interested in actions which will have a direct effect on the availability of reliable and environmentally benign electric generation to meet 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 supply this area and that there is inadequate reserve capacity for the growing electric energy demand of-the area.
Thus, either the shoraham
'lant must be operated or alternative. generating. facilities will have to be built and operated.
Because nn.tural gas supplies cannot easily be increased, oil-burning plants will inevitably-be needed to replace the Shoreham Plant thereby increasing our *
,. -..,, ~,, -.. - -. -
 
reliance on foreign oil and thus reducing the security of our i
energy supply, among other thingu.
These plants, in turn, will emit pollution lowering air quality in the region and l
contributing to global warming and acid rain.
These effects of the Shoreham Plant's decommissioning will have detrimental effects on ny 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 decomminsioning mode, I believe my health, safety and environmental interents would be harmed by any actions inconsistent with nothballing the plant ("sAFSTOR").
9.
I understand that SE has been joined by the Shoreham-2 Wading River Central School District (" School District") in seeking to intervene in a hearing to be held not only on the Confirmatory order, but also in hearings to consider the implications of LILeo's license amendment requests affecting both Physical Security and offsite Emergency Preparedness.
I also understand that the issues raised by all of these actions significantly overlap due to the fact that each of the actions constitute another step in the decommissioning process underway at the Shoreham Plant.
I would favor the consolidation of these three proceedings to consider the issues raised by the School l :
.-. ~
 
. tan :: '91 14:51 r o o n ti. L. A, um stilGTON F.
r% C E. cT n District end SE.
Consolidation would be the most officient and 2
expeditious way to proccod for all concerned.
I also submit that nuch concolidation is demanded by NEPA because all of those segmented proposaln and actionc are, in fact, part of a single proposal, are cumulatively significant, and have no utility independent of tho decommissioning proposal
- c., il I
[''. u
~
. -u..
Stephen v. Musolino SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN BEFORE ME, on thist[/
day o f t A' W/ V
, /99/
T 1991.
,f
/
/
/,.-
f
/.,
, m > a.,.,./,
G-(/
,,,,,f p f
~ Notary Public My Commission expirost N T.~f /EN' A e* Jitt e Wet M l l
. _ _ _ - - - - _ - _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.}}

Latest revision as of 11:33, 16 December 2024

Affidavit of SV Musolino.* Affidavit Re Mod of Plant License
ML20067C574
Person / Time
Site: Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date: 01/31/1991
From: Musolino S
SCIENTISTS & ENGINEERS FOR SECURE ENERGY
To:
Shared Package
ML20067C304 List:
References
91-621-01-OLA, 91-621-1-OLA, OLA, NUDOCS 9102120118
Download: ML20067C574 (7)
v • d • e


Text

.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLF.AR REGUIATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Before Administrative Judges:

Morton B. Margulies, Chairman Dr. George A. Ferguson Dr. Jerry R. Eline

)

In the Matter of

)

Docket No. 50-322-0IA

)

Long Island Lighting Co.,

)

ASLBp No. 91-621-01-oIA Shoreham Nuclear Power Station;

)

Confirmatory order Modifying

)

License (Effactive Immediately)

)

(55 Fed. Reg. 12758, April 5, 1990)

AFFIDAVIT OF STEPREN V. MUSOLINO, Ph.D.

Stophon V. Mucolino, Ph.D., being duly sworn, says as follows:

1.

I, Stephen v. Musolino, reside at 6 Middle Cross, Shoreham, New York 11786 which is about two miles from the shoreham Nuclear Power Station ("Shoreham Plant").

I have ovnod this property for five 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 establich the requisite interest and standing for intervention as of right.

2.

I-have been employed for the past twelve years at Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York 11786, located about five miles from the Shoreham plant.

For the past nine 910212011e 910204 i

ADOCK050g2 l

DR

years, I have worked as a Health Physicist.

I am Assistant for safety to the Project Head of the Reintivistic 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 Masters in Nuclear 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 needs in a safe, economical, and environmentally benign manner.

3.

I have been a member of Scientists and Engineers for Secure Energy, Inc. ( " S E," ) since January 3, 1989.

I authorize SE, to represent my interests, as described herein, in any proceedings to be held in connection with the Immediately Effective Confirmatory Order, issued by the NRC on March 29, 1990, prohibiting the Long Island Lighting Company ("LILC0"),

licensee of the Shoreham plant from placing fuel into the reactor vessel without prior NRC approval.

4.

I am concerned that the confirmatory order constitutes another step in the decommissioning process presently underway at.

]

l l

Shoreham in violation of ny rights under the National q

Environmental Policy Act (*NEPA").

The order reaffirms the previous NRC decisions alloVing LILCO to reduce staffing and 1

maintenance to a level clearly inconsistent with the terms of the i

full power operating license and several NRC regulations.

These very actions which the NRC explicitly allowed are now being advanced as presenting a health and safety threat of such a magnitude that an immediately effective order was issued to effectively prohibit operation.

SE, submitted a section 2.206 request in conjunction with the Shorehan-Wading River Central School District in July of 1989 when the destaffing and plant disassembly activition had only just been announced and'were yet to be inplemented.

The Request asserted that these actions should not be allowed to go forward before publication of a Final Environnental Inpact Statement ("rEIS") pursuant to the dictates of NEPA and because they were inimical to the public health and safety due to their inconsistecy with LILco's license obligations as a full-power licensee.

Despite the fact that the commission denied the request for immediato relief and continues to ignore the issues raised in the original Section 2.206 request and the supplements thereto, it now relies on the results of the challenged actions to justify issuance of the immediately effective order without ordering remedial measures or proposing l

fines.

3 i

l

5, 1 do not believe that any steps in furthorance of the Shoreham Plant's decommissioning should be implemented until a TEIS 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 in a single proceeding.

If the NRC allows steps Which are clearly in

- furtherance of decommissioning, and have no necessary independent utility, to be implemented at the Shoreham Plant prior to the necessary NEPA review, my rights, and the rights of those similarly situated, to have an opportunity to* meaningful comment i

on the environmental consideration of the decommissioning proposal will be prejudiced, if not completely denied. ' Besides 1

reaffirming past actions aimed at removing the shoreham Plant from service and, therefore, in furtherance of decomLissioning, the Confirmatory order also sets the stage for yet other actions in furtherance of decommissioning.

LILCO has applied for a license amendment to recognize the defueled state of the plant which will in turn facilitate the transfer of the plant to the Long Island Power Authority.

The Confirmatory order, which prohibits operation of the plant, is a first link in a chain of actions directed towards the issuance of a liconte amendment authorizing " possession and uso, but not operation."

The issuance of a possession only license would be, in turn, a further step in removing the plant from service which is the first part of "docommissioning" as defined by the NRC regulations. 4 7--

__.-...., ~..,,. _..

..._,,._,_-,,.,,-,...m,

,,...., - _. _,, -. _. _ ~. -, _ -,

~

j i

1 6.

The Confirmatory Order miso represents a threat to my personal radiological health and safety and to my real and s

personal property in violation of my rights under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.

In direct violation of its evn stated enforcement policy, the NRC has failed, in that Order, to require LILeo to undertake remedial actions to bring the Shoreham Plant into compliance with the terms cf its full-power operating license.

Thus, should a determination later be made to operate the shoreham Plant, deterioration allowed by LILCO and-by that

. incomplete order will at the least move operation further away in time, and at the worst, increase the likelihood and risk of a.

radiological accident, i

7.

As a Long Island resident, I am also interested in actions which will have a direct effect on the availability of reliable and environmentally benign electric generation to meet 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 supply this area and that there is inadequate reserve capacity for the growing electric energy demand of-the area.

Thus, either the shoraham

'lant must be operated or alternative. generating. facilities will have to be built and operated.

Because nn.tural gas supplies cannot easily be increased, oil-burning plants will inevitably-be needed to replace the Shoreham Plant thereby increasing our *

,. -..,, ~,, -.. - -. -

reliance on foreign oil and thus reducing the security of our i

energy supply, among other thingu.

These plants, in turn, will emit pollution lowering air quality in the region and l

contributing to global warming and acid rain.

These effects of the Shoreham Plant's decommissioning will have detrimental effects on ny 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 decomminsioning mode, I believe my health, safety and environmental interents would be harmed by any actions inconsistent with nothballing the plant ("sAFSTOR").

9.

I understand that SE has been joined by the Shoreham-2 Wading River Central School District (" School District") in seeking to intervene in a hearing to be held not only on the Confirmatory order, but also in hearings to consider the implications of LILeo's license amendment requests affecting both Physical Security and offsite Emergency Preparedness.

I also understand that the issues raised by all of these actions significantly overlap due to the fact that each of the actions constitute another step in the decommissioning process underway at the Shoreham Plant.

I would favor the consolidation of these three proceedings to consider the issues raised by the School l :

.-. ~

. tan :: '91 14:51 r o o n ti. L. A, um stilGTON F.

r% C E. cT n District end SE.

Consolidation would be the most officient and 2

expeditious way to proccod for all concerned.

I also submit that nuch concolidation is demanded by NEPA because all of those segmented proposaln and actionc are, in fact, part of a single proposal, are cumulatively significant, and have no utility independent of tho decommissioning proposal

- c., il I

[. u

~

. -u..

Stephen v. Musolino SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN BEFORE ME, on thist[/

day o f t A' W/ V

, /99/

T 1991.

,f

/

/

/,.-

f

/.,

, m > a.,.,./,

G-(/

,,,,,f p f

~ Notary Public My Commission expirost N T.~f /EN' A e* Jitt e Wet M l l

. _ _ _ - - - - _ - _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20067C574&oldid=4430679"