Images de page
PDF
ePub

12 Storey Avenue
Newburyport, MA 01950
November 17, 1986

Members of the U.S. House of Representatives
Federal, State and Local Officials

To All Whom It May Concern:

I realize that you are here to gather all the facts and relevant information regarding the safety of the Seabrook Nuclear Plant. There are many qualified people who can help you with your fact-finding and licensing issues. However, there is another personal side to this issue that you also need to know. As a resident of Newburyport, I feel qualified to speak on certain of these issues. It is unfortunate that Seabrook Yankee went ahead on Governor Sununu's approval and built their $50,000,000,000 project when the residents of this area have been opposed to such construction all along. We live in an environmentally protected area by choice because we love the natural beauty and take care to see that our natural gift is preserved. We teach our children to respect and appreciate this land, also. Many of us have an extremely hard time understanding how a business whose main interest is profit can be allowed to take over and threaten the health and safety of our lives, families and environment for the sake of making money when their plan to "protect" our safety is totally unfeasible.

On regular afternoon commutes, traffic by Seabrook Yankee on Route 107 is slow moving and heavy from 3:00 to 6:00 P.M. on weekdays. There is only one lane for most of the traffic each way under normal conditions. Yet, the Seabrook officials want us to believe that they can evacuate the area in six hours for a ten mile radius from the plant. Even if this were realistic, assuming everyone stayed calm and followed directions, sheltering is stated to be effective for only two hours. Therefore, exposing many thousands of people to radiation before evacuation is even possible. As a school teacher I may be asked to wait with other people's children while mine are only minutes away and scared, confused and needing me to help them in a serious time of fear and trauma. What should I do then? How can I decide what my obligation is? How can I be of any real help to anyone when all I have lived and worked for is jeopardized for the sake of profit and power production.

If it is my choice, my God-given and Constitutional right to decide, I would choose less power and to let the profits go to the citizens and not to the conglomerate of investors whose lives, children, families and homes are safe. Who is willing to pay the price of our safety? Right now, the citizens who are awake in this

area are appealing to you, those who do have power. We are feeling quite weak and lost up against spokemen whose glib facts cover up their ulterior motives with placebos of concern and allegations that we are all radical anti-nuclear activists. We need some sane, reasonable, objective opinions from those who do have power in our free country to hear our pleas for help and representation. President heagan and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission do not know They are looking at the facts and only the facts that they concern themselves with such as energy needs, projected figures, the folly and embarrassment of expensive mistakes, profit and loss and the crossed fingers approach to our not having a nuclear accident while they are in power.

us.

Please, please, look at us, the thousands and tens of thousands of human beings who live here. We do not want a nuclear waste sight in our backyards. We have been working hard to curb pollution, to clean up the Herrimac River, to teach our children not to litter so that we can keep America beautiful. We have no insurance to cover all we have worked for and invested in to make a secure future for ourselves and our children. Flease do not be swayed by the fear of financial loss to a company who had no rights to threaten us in the first place, who had no rights to hold us responsible for their bad investment which would raise our electric rates three hundred percent, permanantly alter our environment and force us to live in the shadow of their staff decisions in a time of potential disaster.

We are looking to you for help. Please don't let us down. We want to believe in equal representation and our God given rights to the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. We want to believe that human lives are more important than money, that the environment is more important than profit, that safety is more important than big business. In faith, we look to you and to God that justice will be served.

Thank you for your concern and for your fair hearing.

[blocks in formation]

Amesbury High School
Highland Street
Amesbury, MA 01913
November 18,1986

Subcommittee on Energy Conservation and Power:

Welcome to Amesbury High School. I have the pleasure of coming here every day to teach English. I am also the representative for the Amesbury Public Schools on the Amesbury Radiological Emergency Response Plan Committee.

I would like to explain the major reasons that I have for sharing Amesbury's decision to withdraw from the planning process a year ago. This action was the only step we could take to ensure the safety of our citizens, since we discovered that the definition of "adequate" emergency response plans according to the industry and federal regulatory documents means "adequate enough to license a power plant" not " adequate enough to guarantee the safety of all residents of our town.

Our committee's work centered around two fundamental planning questions: How much time do we need?

The

How much time have we got?

discrepancy in time needed and time available left us grave concerns for our citizens' safety. "Time" is especially crucial for certain groups: The elderly, hospitalized, and school children. These are the groups whose evacuation is dependent upon aid from others civilians, other than public safety officials.

[ocr errors]

In part, I represent on the Committee a large per cent of the civilian work force that the emergency plans have given mandated responsibilities. We had been given no chance for prior input or participation in creating these plans. Our plans followed the standard plan used throughout the country which state that teachers are responsible for students in sheltering or evacuation events necessitated by accidents at nuclear power plants. Our conderns as teachers include: --Liability for injury or loss of students

The right of a private industry to necessitate indefinite, perhaps life-threatening responsibility for an indefinite time (since we are "responsible until all children have been claimed by parents") --Our loss of right of self-determination. Those of us who are parents ourselves worry about our families stranded in other places.

For voicing such concerns, I have been criticized for not being

a good teacher, a deserter who would "head for the hills."

In response, I maintain that I am obligated to voice concerns now, while there is time. There is no allowance for human reaction or emotion in these plans.

Events at Chernobyl proved that the "human reaction" will happen. Top officials at the plant who left their posts to secure the safety of their own families during the accident were later officially condemned as "cowards."

We are not employed by the industry which necessitates this plan. We should not have to choose between our own children and our school children. After serving on our local committee, my dominant concerns remain for the safety of the children of Amesbury. I am more convinced than ever that a satisfactory plan cannot be created to protect school children. Our committee analyzed the following issues:

I. Alternate methods of evacuating children, besides waiting for buses from outside areas. The industry could purchase enough buses to evacuate all children. The question of driver availability and liability remain.

II. Parent Response/ Chaos Control

I will always believe that parents will come to the schools to
find their children, tather than leave town to meet them at a
distant reception center.

III. Early dismissal of Children in case of Low-Grade Events.

Many students in grades 1-12 regularly walk to school, up to
a two-mile limit. In the time needed to walk home, an incident
may have been upgraded, and the children are outside, unprotected.
Parents who work during school hours likewise do not want their
children sent home to empty houses.

IV. Sheltering

According to NUREG 0654 and nuclear consultants, sheltering is a viable alternative only for two hours, after which evacuation must be considered necessary. I posed a theoretical question:

What happens if the two hours are up and the plume still covers the evacuation route?

Answer: Bus drivers cannot be required to enter a contaminated
area, but may volunteer to do so. The students and staff are
trapped.

A certain percentage of any population cannot be guaranteed safe evacuation, we are told. I think that it is inexcusable that our children are considered part of the group of "expendables."

No $5 billion industry is worth the lives of my children-- not those of my daughter and son, nor those of the 100 young adults I teach every day.

I ask you, as a committee, to consider:

I. The roles of civilians in plans

II. The true "Adequacy" of plans

Patricia Hort

Thank you very much for allowing this hearing to be held here,

and for allowing us to be heard.

Sincerely,
Patricia A.L.Hoyt

To:

The Congressional Sub-Commitee on Energy Conservation
and Power- Congressman Edward J. Markey, Chairman.

Many of us in the town of Stratham signed a petition requesting Congressional investigation of Seabrook Station. We wish to thank you for coming to the seacoast to listen to us, and to reaffirm that the American democratic process is alive and well.

Should there be an accident at Seabrook Station, the key
escape route from Strathan is a narrow chain swing-bridge over
The Squanscott River, a scene of many past accidents. Without
access to this bridge we are confronted with the vast expanse
of Great Bay and the option of heading to Exeter to cross the
river, or 20 miles north to cross the Piscataqua River Bridge
from Newington to Dover. Who would assist the townspeople at such
a time is questionable. According to the Emergency Evacuation
Plans given to the town, the chairman of the Board of Selectman
is fully in charge in the event of an emergancy. However, the
Chairman, Garrett Dolan, who is also Civil Defense Director,
works in the town of Seabrook, and obviously would not reach
Stratham in time to direct evacuation.

Public Service Company chose to do things backwards,
building the plant before examining the possibility of a workable
evacuation. But now the problem cannot be ignored. Three-
Mile Island and Chernobyl have taught us that accidents can
and do ocour. Add to this the possibility of an insider terrorist
threat or a truck bomb attack due to the plants proximity
to Pease Air Force Base which is a top Soviet target and the
picture is not good for us. We cannot be evacuated from
or the other seacoast towns in the case of a nuclear emergency.
Please help us avoid a future of fearful anticipation by listening
to and acting on our very real concerns about our health, safety,
and welfare. We ask that you call for a full congressional
investigation concerning the Seabrook Power Plant.
17 tiriamui Road,

Дороти
Charles H.

Killy 17

Dean menchant-us

17 Kirriemvir Rd St. State sincerely.
Heights Rd-Strathaus

Pamela Merchant #13 Height Kd. Stratham

Elizabeth

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Allan Batchelde

73

Union Rd Strathan

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors][merged small]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Stratham

[blocks in formation]

bawlyn & Lanzillo Harry Sanzillo

[ocr errors]

over

« PrécédentContinuer »