ML20073D720

Forwards R Seasonwein Assoc,Inc Complete Survey Results. Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20073D720
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	04/07/1983
From:	Brodsky R NEW YORK, STATE OF
To:	NRC
References
ISSUANCES-SP, NUDOCS 8304140140
Download: ML20073D720 (30)

Text

1 LA THE ASSEMBLY Jo . , A m a STATE OF NEW YORK g.

'TT g .7_

b

• ALBANY I RICHARD L BROOSKY AssamtWman geth Detnet ,

eg3 FPR 13 pyo:94 April 7,.1983 As was agreed at Mr. Seasonwein's last appearance, enclosed please find a i

complete copy of his survey results.

Sincerely, 4lalurL4.bnh Richard L. Brodsky V

1 l

I

/

8304140140 830407 PDR ADOCK 05000 0

r UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of )

)

CONSOLIDATED EDIS0N COMPANY OF NEW YORK ) Docket Nos. 50-247 SP (IndianPointUnit2) ) 50-286 SP

)

POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK )

(Indian Point Unit 3) .

)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the COMPLETE SET OF RESULTS FROM THE ROCER SEASONREIN ASSOCIATES, INC., SURVEY in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the following by deposit in the United States mail, first class, postpaid, this 7th day of April, 1983.

k

EllenD.Spilka'[

NYPIRG

• 9 Murray Street New York, NY 10007 i

l

l Jrmas P. G1cecon, Etq., Chairman Dockating and Service Brsnch Administrstiva Judg2 Office of the Sacretary

' Atomic Ssfsty cnd Licsnaing Board U.S. liuclear R:gulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory, Commission Washington, DC 20555

• 513 Gilmoure Drive Silver Springs, MD 20901 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Dr. Oscar H. Paris Washington, DC 20555 Administrative Judge 1

, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Atomic Safety and Licensing Appea'l Beard

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Washington, DC 20555 1 Mr. Frederick J. Shon Paul F. Colarulli, Esq.

Administrative Judge 3 Joseph J. Levin, Esq.

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board ?amela S. Horowitz, Esq.

U.S. Nuc,lepr Regulatory Commission 4harles Morgan, Jr., Esq.

Morgan Associates, Chartered 1899 L Street, NW Washington, DC 205T5 i

Mayor Webster Pierce l Village of Buchanan Janice E. Moore, Esq. 236 Tate Avenue i

' Donald F. Hassell,^Esq. Buchanan, NY 10511 Henry J. McGurren, ' Esq.

office of the Executive Legal Director Stanley B. Klimberg, Esq.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 New York State Energy Office Two Empire State Plaza Brent L. Brandenburg, Esq. Albany, NY 12223 Assistant General Counsel Oonsolidat'ed Edison Company of New Marc L. Parris, Esq.

York, Inc., Eric Thorsen, Esq.

4 Irving Place County Attorney New York, NY 10003 County of Rockland 11 New Hempstead Road Charles M. Pratt, Esq. New City, NY 10956 Stephen L. Baum, Esq.

Power Authority of the State of New Hon. Andrew P. O'Rourke York Westchester County Executive 10 Columbus Circle Laurie Vetere, Esq.

New York, NY 10019 148 Martine Avenue White Plains, NY 10601 Jonathon D. Feinberg New York State Public Service Ezra I . Bialik, Esq.

Commission Steve Leipzig, Esq.

Three Empire State Plaza Environmental Protection Bureau Albany, NY 12223 New York State Attorney General's Office Two World Trade Center Charles J. Maikish, Esq. New York, NY 10047 Litigation Division l The Port Authority of New York and Donald Davidoff, Director New Jersey New York State Radiological Emergency One World Trade Center Preparedness Group New York, NY 10048 Empire State Plaza Tower Building, Room 1750 Albany,_NY 12237 1

- - -y.- .v. - -

f

~

pavidb.Pikus,Esq. Iharles A. Schninsr, Co-Chairp rgon Richard F. Czzja, Esq. Westchester People's Action Coalition, Inc.

Rhea and Gould PO Box 488 G30 lbdison Avenue White Plains, NY 10602 New York, NY 10017 Alan Latman, Esq.

Phyllis Rodriguez, Spokesperson 44 Sunset Drive Parents Conces ed About Indian Point Croton-on-Hudson, NY 10520 PO Box 125 Croton-on-Hudson, NY 10520 41pporah S. Fleisher West Branch Conservation Association Richard M. Hartzman, Esq. 443 Buena Vista Road Lorna Salzman New City, NY 10956 Friends of the Earth, Inc.

208 West 13th Street Melvin Goldberg, Staff Attorney New York, NY 10011 Joan Holt, Project Director New York Public Interest Research Group, Inc.

Judith Kessler, Coordinator '9 Murray St 3et Rockland Citizens for Safe Energy New York, NY 10007 300 New Hempstead Road -

New City, NY 10956 Craig Kaplan, Esq.

National Emergency Civil Liberties Committee Renee Schwartz, Esq. 175 Fifth Avenue, Paul Chessin, Esq. New York, NY 10010 Laurens R. Schwartz, Esq.

Margaret Oppel, Esq. Amanda Potterfield, Esq.

Botein, Hays, Sklar, and Hertzberg John ston and George, Attys-at-Law 200 Park Avenue 528 Iowa Avenue New York, NY 10166 Iowa City, Iowa 52240 David B. Dubof f Joan Miles Westchester People's Action Indian Point Coordinator Coalition, Inc. New York City Audubon Society 255 Grove Street 71 West 23rd Street, Suite 1828 White Plains, NY 10601 New York, NY 10010 Andrew S. Roffe, Esq. Ellyn R. Weiss, Esq.

New York State Assembly William S. Jordan, III, Esq.

Albany, NY 12248 Harmon and We'iss 1725 I Street NW Suite 506 Hon. Richard Brodsky Washington, DC 20006 Member of the Assembly 429 LOB Jeffrey M. Blum, Esq.

Albany, NY 12248 New York University Law School 423 Vanderbilt Hall Spence W. Perry, Esq. 40 Washington Square South Office of General Counsel New York, NY 10012 Federal Emergency Management Agency 500 C Street SW Greater New York Council on Energy Washington, DC 20555 c/o Dean Corren, Director New York University Stewart M. Glass, Esq. 26 Stuyvesant Street Regional Counsel New York, NY 10003 Federal Emergency Management Agency Room 1349 Steven C. Sholly l 26 Federal Plaza Union of Concerned Scientists New York, NY 10278 1346 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 1101 l

! Washington, DC 20036 l

l l

L

Hon. Ruth Messinger Member of the Council of the City of New York District #4 City Hall New York, NY 10007

-Michael D. Diederich, Jr., Esq.

Fitzgerald, Lynch, & Diederich 24 Central Drive Stony Point, NY. , 10980 Administrative Judge James A. Laurenson Atanic Sc1tfety & Licensing Board .

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comnission Washington, D.C. 20555 David Icwis, Esq.

Atanic Safety & Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comnission Washington, D.C. 20555 ww.-

_ . . , . _ . ~ _ _ _, ,y, 4- ,., - _ .,

r * -

_= .

. V1

. tA ~

i

' f AWARENESS OF INDI AN POINT <

Inside Rest of 10 Mile zone westchester i t t O I

i H7ard of site 100 '. 89 .

Awareness of nuclear plants 99 92 Aided 86 79 Unaided 13 13 l e

1 r

.T seger seasonwein associates,Inc.

1

6:-

n

i. r -

p T-2 ,.

C,, f NUMBER OF NUCLEAR PIRITS AT INDIAN POINT p.

i.

Inside mest of v 10 Mile Eone Westchester  ;

4  %

One 6 24 Two 23 14 More than two 31 14 None 4 0 Don't know 36 48

.f

.P.

l 1

1 1

1 e

, sogar seasonweln associates,Inc.

i T-3 l

l WHEniER DIE NUCLEAR PLANTS AT INDIAN POINT SHOULD BE KEPT OPERATING Inside Rest of 10 Mile Zone westchester Initial attitudes before arguments given on both sides:

Keep operating 44 50 Should shut down 45 34 Ibn't know 11 16 Attitudes af ter arguments given on both sides:

Keep operating 46.5 53 Should shut down 46.5 ... 39 Don't know 7 8 I

1 l

l l

l l

l l

roger seasonwein associates,Inc. i i

l

' i 9

l 'I -I T-4 '

l IF INDI AN POINT WERE SHUT DOWN WOULD 'IHE ELECTRICITY RA'IES IN WESTCHESTER [

l INCR"ASE AND IF SO, BY WH AT PERCEWTAGE

• l C Inside Rest of F, 10 Mile Zone Westchester -

g g

• Would increase 77 65 Would increase by:

10s 19 17 20% 27 26 30% 11 5 40% 2 2 50s 1 2 More than 50% 2 3 Don't know 16 ,,, 10 j

i reger esasonwein essociates,Inc. l 1

T-5 l

ARE: 'INE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS AT INDIAN POINT BASICALLY SAIT OR UNSAFE , l l

l l

Inside Best of l 10 Mile zone Wp tchester --

Safe 45 45 Unsafe 47 41 -

l 1

Mixed emotions 1 -- I Don' t know . 7 14 l 9

?-

\

reger seasonwein associates,Inc.

1

. l

. l T-6 l 1

HOW LIKELY IS DIAT RADIOACTIVE MATERIAIS COULD BE RELEASED FROM DIE PLANTS I AT INDI AN POINT AND HOW SERIOUS A HEAJmi HAZARD WOULD MIAT BE Inside Rest of 10 Mile zone Westchester j Very likely 17 21 Somewhat likely 39 29 Fael emission likely and the health hazard (in general) would be Serious 41 28 Somewhat serious 10 13 Not serious 5 2 Don't know 0 7 Fael emission likely and the health hazard (personally) would be:

Serious 42 .. 24 Somewhat serious 10 19 Not serious 5 5 Don't know 0 2 -

1 l

1 1

1 l

reger seasonwein associates,Inc.

1

s T-7  !

I DIE MOST SERIOUS ACCILEffT WAT COULD HAPPEN WIN ANY NUCLEAR PLANT

, i. >

Inside Rest of t 10 Mile Zone Westchester 4  %

Could explode IB 16 .

Meltdown 69 62 I Don't know 13 22 l

l i

t l

)

l I

b f

i l

roger seasonwein associates,Inc.

T-8 HAS A NUCLEAR PLANT EVER EXPLODED IN WIIS COUNTRY ELSEWHERE Inside Rest of 10 Mile Zone Westchester Yes 1 5 No 13 11 Don't know 86 84 l

.- l I

1 regor seasonwein associates,Inc.

I

.1

- T-9 l l

ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF OPENING 'nlE NUCLEAR POWER PLAITIS AT INDIAN POINT -

Rest of Westchester Strong Weak Don't  !

Argument Argument Know I L t t Nuclear energy has been providing electricity to residents of New York State from the Indian Point site since 1962, when one of the nation's first nuclear electric plants began operating.

The two plants currently operating at Indian Point provide a significant amount of the power needed by New Yorkers for jobs, for

chools and most of the power for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's commuter railroads and subways and for come 75 government agencies, including the street lighting, public housing, water filtration and other electrical needs of counties, villages and school systems. 49 38 13

~~

ty using nuclear energy as its fuel, Indian Point makes unnecessary the burning of some 20 million barrels of imported oil each year.

By substituting nuclear energy for imported cil, the two plants save consumers half a billion dollars a year in electric rates. 30 46 24

'o i

1 roger seasonwein associates,Inc.

i j .

l

I -

( l T-9A ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF OPENING ' DIE NUCIIAR POWER PLAN 7S AT INDI AN POINT Rest of Westchester Strong Weak Don't Argument Argument Know In nearly 20 years, the operation of the Indian Point plants has never caused an injury to a member of the public. Mechanical mal-functions have interrupted operations at times, cnd occasionally have caused small releases of radiation inside the containment building but have never led to a significant release beyond the plant boundry. 39 46 15 From the beginning scientists and engineers htve recognized the potential hazard of nuclear plcnts-the accidental release of radioactive materials-and designed the plants to prevent a large release from happening. 44 41 15 If the plants at Indian Point are closed the olectricity rates in Westchester will go up ct least 10% and perhaps as much as 20%. 46 39 15 ,

i 1

1 1

l l

l l

l 1- roger seasonwein associates,Inc.

l

1 .

3

.. s

. T-10  ;;

ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF OPENING 'IHE NUCLEAR POWER PLAN'IS AT INDIAN POINT Inside 2 10 Mile Zone  ?

Strong Weak Don't Argument Argument Know Nuclear energy has been providing electricity to residents of New York State from the Indian Point site since 1962, when one of the nation's first nuclear electric plants began operating.

The two plants currently operating at Indian Point provide a significant amount of the power n;eded by New Yorkers for jobs, for schools and most of the power for the Metropolitan Trans-portation Authority's commuter railroads and cubways and for 75 government agencies, in-

• cluding the street lighting, public housing, water filtration and other electrical needs cf counties, villages and school systems. 49 44 8 By using nuclear energy as its fuel, Indian Point makes unnecessary the burning of some 20 million barrels of imported oil each year.

y substituting nuclear energy for imported oil, the two plants save consumers half a billion dollars a year in electric rates. 33 54 14 t

roger seasonwein associates,Inc.

e.

=

,.s T-10A '

?.-

ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF OPENING '1HE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS AT INDIAN POINT j,<

Inside ;h 10 Mile zone .

Strong Weak Don't Argument Argument Know t t t In nearly 20 years, the operation of the Indian Point plants has never caused an injury to a member of the public. Mechanical malfunctions have interrupted operations at times, and

• occasionally have caused small releases of

• rcdiation inside the containment building, but hnve never led to a significant release beyond the plant boundry. 47 49 5 From the beginning scientists and engineers

'hsve recognized the potential hazard of nuclear ,

plcnts-the accidental release of radioactive materials-and designed the plants to prevent a large release from happening. 39 57 5 If the plants at Indian Point are closed th2 electricity rates in Westchester will go up at least 10% and perhaps as much as 20%. 41 56 4 l

reger seasonwein associates,Inc.

1 8 e

T-11 ARGUMENTS OPPOSING DIE OPENING OF TIE NUCLEAR POWER PLAN'IS AT INDI AN POINT

]

Rest of '

Wes tcheste r '

S trong Weak Don't Argument Argument Know It is possible that Indian Point may have been nieded in 1962 when the first nuclear plant began running there but the two nuclear plants cre increasingly unneeded now. In large part this is because the amount of electricity used by the average Westchester residents has gone down a lot and continues to decline. Talk that the Indian Point plants are needed to provide electricity that protects jobs is just a scare tactic. 24 62 14 Indian Point does almost nothing to reduce the ute of foreign oil in this area. While those who fcvor the plants talk about saving 20 million barrels of oil a year by having these atomic plants, they don't mention that this amount of

~~

oil is not even 10% of the foreign oil used around here. 20 64 16 Se operators of Indian Point claim that no one has been injured by it in 20 years. nis probably means that our luck is about to run cut since there have been many times when each of the two plants there have had something wrong and one of the plants was just shut down

• rscently because it was said to be unsafe. 37 54 9.

i reger seasonwein associates,Inc.  ;

e

T-11A f

ARGUMEN'IS OPPOSING WE OPENING OF WE NUCIZAR POWER PLANTS AT INDIAN POIE Rest of Westchester Strong Weak Don't Argument Argument Know Scientists still have not solved the problem of how to safely store, on a long-term basis, th2 radioactive wastes produced by nuclear power plants and 'the related problem of where to safely dispose of these nuclear wastes.

Wastchester has accumulated a stockpile of this nuclear waste because there is no cd;quate plan for its disposal. 61 30 9 Indian Point is located in the sost populated croa of any nuclear power plant in the country.

If an evacuation were necessary for the area currounding the Indian Point Plant, such an svacuation would be impossible in the light of the numbers of people to be moved, the oxisting road network and the lack of ,,

protective equipment. 63 30 7 I

l i

1 I

roger seasonwein associates,Inc.

m 1 1

1 T-12 9 l ARGUMENTS OPPOSING ' DIE OPENING OF MfE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS AT INDIAN POINT Inside 10 Mile zone Strong Weak Don't Argument Argument Know n t t It is possible that Indian Point may have been nseded in 1962 when the first nuclear plant began running there but the two nuclear plants are increasingly unneeded now. In large part this is because the amount of electricity used by the average Westchester residents has gone down a lot and continues to decline. Talk that the Indian Point plants are needed to provide electricity that protects jobs is just a scare tactic. 21 67 13 Indian Point does almost nothing to reduce the use of foreign oil in this area. While those who favor the plants talk about saving 20 million barrels of oil a year by having these ctomic plants, they don't mention that this amount of oil is not even 10% of the foreign ~~

cil used around here. 31 51 19 '

he operators of Indian Point claim that no one has been injured by it in 20 years, his probably means that our luck is about to run cut since there have been many times when occh of the two plants there have had some-thing wrong and one of the plants was just chut down recently because it was said to be unsafe.... -'

40 56 5 1

1 l

.- l l

l l roger seasonwein associates,Inc.

e

• T-12A ARGUMENTS OPPOSING 'n{E OPENING OF ' DIE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS AT INDI AN POINT Inside 10 Mile Zone Strong Weak Don't Argument Argument Know Scientists still have not solved the problem of how to safely store, on a long-term basis, the radioactive wastes produced by nuclear power plants and the related problem of where to safely dispose of these nuclear wastes.

Wastchester has accumulated a stockpile of this nuclear waste because there is no cdequate plan; for its disposal. 53 39 9 Indian Point is located in the most populated crea of any nuclear power plant in the country.

If an evacuation were necessary for the area currounding the Indian Point Plant, such an cvacuation would be impossible in the light of the numbers of people to be moved, the cxisting road network and the laet of protective equipment. **

63 30 8 reger seasonwein associates,Inc.

, 1 1

T-13 l

l l

WHEnlER DIE PLANTS AT INDIAN POINT HELP HOLD DOWN REAL ESTATE TAXES Inside Rest of 10 Mile Zone Westchester ,,

4  %

Great deal 4 4 Somewhat 17 10 Not too much 20 22 Not at all 46 47 Don't know .

13 17 l

I l

l

.< l 1

reger seasonwein associates,Inc.

.. ( .- l A  ?

l

t. 1 l.1 WHE'HIER 3EGIVED BOOKLET ON INDIAN POINT AND RELATED QLESTIONS f/

1 F.

P Inside V*:

10 Mile zone r[ =-

i t 1

l e

I Received booklet 47 l 1 -

• l l

l Read or glanced at it 45

Still have it 31 i

l Know where it is 20 i

j .- ,

4 1

1

.i 1

1 ..

i 1

3 i

i.

j ...

1 .

1

't i

i i

t i

I reger seasonwein associates,Inc.

a

---,-__._,__r , - . , _. , . . . . . _ _ _ . , , _ , -

. . 6.

C  ;-

y

. i e.

HOW MUOI OF ' DIE BOOKLET WAS READ - h l-Inside i.

10 Mile tone p-t

\

All 48 Most 13 About half 15 Less than half 22

• None 2 1 ...

1 reger seasonwein associates,Inc.

e e go >=e

_y _ -- ---. _ , . - .- , , _- . - -

D AWARE 'DIAT HIGi-PITCHED SIREN SOUND MEANS DIAT RADIATION HAS BEEN RELEASED AND A EMERENCY HAS OCCURRED AND WHAT SHOULD BE DONE Inside 10 Mile Zone 4

Aware 89 l

What should be done: ,

Stay indoors 66 Imave area 25 Pay no attention 6 Don't know 3

.)

+  !

e 1

1

.?

reger seasonwein associates,Inc.

-~

T WHEDiER KNOWS ABOUT A PREDESIGNAITD ROAD ROU1T TO BE TAKEN IN AN EVACUATION AND WHEDIER WOULD TAKE IT Inside I 10 Mile zone l t i l

l Yes, there is a predesignated road route 31 No, don' t know if there is a predesignated road route 69 Yes, would take the predesignated road route 41 Would leave the best way know how 56 Don't know 3 I

reger seasonwein associates,Inc.

I G

WHE'INER KNOWS WHIOf ME3PTION GN1ER OIILD WOULD BE TAKEN 'IO IN AN EVACUATION DURING SOiOOL HOURS Inside 10 Mile zone t

Yes 8 No, don't know 92 t

~ ?*

I BASE: Parents 1

I 1

seger seasonwein associates,Inc.

1 I

l

t H

WHEDIER EVAC 1ETION PIAN SHOULD REMAIN AS IT IS CR FEEL sHOULD RE alt 4tfED

'!O PICX UP OIILD DIRECTLY FROM SOiOOL j Inside  :

10 Mile zone '

Attitudes before argument Remain as is 16 Pick up child directly 12 Don' t know 72 E

Attitudes after arguments Remain as is 7 Pick up child directly 7 Don' t know 86 4

BASE: Parents .

1 ,

I reger seasonwein associates,Inc.

. l

) ...

I (O

MIE'11tER WOULD FOIL 0W WE PIAN, IN WE CASE OF AN EMISSION OF RADIOACTIVE . l p_

MA'IERI ALS , OR WOULD DO SOME*DlING ELSE ]

'i c

l Rest of

{

We stchester [t g * ' l Would follow plan---stay put 44 Would go closer --

Would get further away 53 9

Don' t know 3 l

i l

. . l 1

1 1

1 i

... 1 l

roger seasonwein associates,Inc.

3  :

a m WHOM IECISIONS RELAED E 'plE OPERATION OF ' DIE NUCIZAR POWER P1. ANTS AT

• INDIAN POINT SHOULD BE IEIEGATED .

a i

Rest of '

Westches te r ,

I Con Ed and the New York State Power Authority 23 Professionals brought in from outside who are trained in the nuclear energy .

field 75 Elected representatives 20 Public 23 b

roger seasonwein associates,Inc.

. . .