Re: Salem, N.J.

[Jacques.Read@eh.doe.gov]

Ms. Weiner recounted her experiences "Apologies in advance -- rant to follow.
Skip it if you don't like rants,
please."

In the mid-70s, as an NRC employee, I was sent to Salem, N.J., along with the
licensing project manager for the Hope Creek application to meet with
prospective intervenors.  This was during a very brief period when NRC
management decided that the intervenor contentions were becoming so frivolous
that the public hearings were looking a little ridiculous.  In this particular
case, a family living just outside town had somehow obtained a list of
contentions from some national group to be used as a basis for intervening.  The
big problem was the contentions mostly applied to a PWR, which Hope Creek is
not.  Our job was to elicit from them the root cause of their objections so that
they could rephrase them in a form roughly applicable to a BWR.  (I do not
remember the couple's names; it is possible that I have already met the Cohens.)
It was very much like talking to fenceposts -- they weren't interested in any
differences between BWRs and PWRs. They were opposed to the construction of Hope
Creek and saw any requirement that they actually have a reason for their
opposition as being unfair.  Needless to say, our mission was not successful,
and similar experiences at other sites quickly led to the discontinuance of that
brilliant management scheme. Whoever goes to Salem will have an amazing
experience.  Repeatedly you can force a "fill-in-the-blanks" to the statement
.."I am opposed to X  because of Y." Each time you explain X and Y and the ways
in which they may or may not be related you will learn that X and Y are really
immaterial to their decision.

Good luck to whoever sallies forth.



************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html