Future of San Onofre Plant Debated at Public Hearing : Utilities: SCE officials and workers line up against the state and environmentalists who want to close the nuclear facility by 1998. A second meeting is tonight.

More than 200 people descended on City Hall on Tuesday for a public hearing to determine the fate of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station.

The early arrivals found standing room only, and those outside gleaned what they could from the public address system.

The hearing was the first of two before an administrative law judge on the state’s proposal to close the plant by 1998.

The 2,500 employees who would lose their jobs are pitted against environmentalists and state officials who want the plant shut down.

“It’s difficult to understand how one could so easily dismiss the devastation that such a loss of jobs would bring,” said Scott Diehl, mayor of San Clemente, one of many neighboring cities that oppose the closure. Diehl warned against “the premature and untimely” closure of San Onofre.

The Utility Workers Union of America, which has been lobbying to keep the plant open, says it infuses more than $250 million into the surrounding communities.

But opponents include environmentalists who fear a nuclear accident. Before the hearing, members of the Alliance for Survival, a Santa Ana-based environmental group, staged a demonstration pledging to mount a statewide campaign to close San Onofre.

“Nuclear power has failed on all counts. It’s not safe, not cheap and not clean,” said Marion Pack, executive director of the alliance. “It is time we stopped using one of the most dangerous elements known to humankind to do something as simple as boil water.”

Opponents also argue that the plant costs too much to operate and are urging Southern California Edison Co. officials to consider alternative forms of energy.

“We think nuclear power plants are uneconomical,” said Ira Kalinsky, the attorney for the Public Utilities Council, an advocacy group for rate powers. “It’s cheaper to just shut down the plant and buy energy at market value.”

San Onofre provides 12% of all the electricity to Southern California Edison customers, and supporters of closing it say ratepayers would save $1 billion if it converted.

But Brian Katz, a spokesman for San Onofre, said opponents are miscalculating.

“Southern California Edison’s costs are competitive when the calculations are done correctly,” he said.

Southern California Edison officials, which also opposes the closure, say converting to natural gas and other types of energy would contribute to pollution while nuclear power, they argue, is pollution free.

The second public hearing will be held at 7:30 tonight at Fullerton High School.

The administrative law judge will present his report to the Public Utilities Commission, which is expected to decide the question later this year.