Comment (199) Submitted by Robert K. Musil, on Behalf of the Physicians for Social Responsibility, on Petition for Rulemaking PRM-73-12, Upgrade the Design Basis Threat RegulationsML050310229 |
Person / Time |
---|
Site: |
Indian Point, Oyster Creek, Diablo Canyon, San Onofre |
---|
Issue date: |
01/24/2005 |
---|
From: |
Musil R Physicians for Social Responsibility, Washington, DC |
---|
To: |
NRC/SECY/RAS |
---|
Ngbea E S |
References |
---|
+adjud/ruledam200505, 69FR64690 00199, PRM-73-12 |
Download: ML050310229 (3) |
|
|
---|
Category:Rulemaking-Comment
MONTHYEARML22215A2362022-07-28028 July 2022 Comment (037) from Peter Gebhardt on PR-20, 26, 50, 51, 52, 72, 73 and 140 - Regulatory Improvements for Production and Utilization Facilities Transitioning to Decommissioning ML22215A0632022-07-26026 July 2022 Comment (028) from Emilia Silva on PR-20, 26, 50, 51, 52, 72, 73 and 140 - Regulatory Improvements for Production and Utilization Facilities Transitioning to Decommissioning ML22215A0652022-07-26026 July 2022 Comment (030) from Evie Horton on PR-20, 26, 50, 51, 52, 72, 73 and 140 - Regulatory Improvements for Production and Utilization Facilities Transitioning to Decommissioning ML22215A0672022-07-26026 July 2022 Comment (032) from Jean Rivlin on PR-20, 26, 50, 51, 52, 72, 73 and 140 - Regulatory Improvements for Production and Utilization Facilities Transitioning to Decommissioning ML22125A1502022-05-0303 May 2022 Comment (010) from the Californians for Green Nuclear Power, Inc. on PR-20, 26, 50, 51, 52, 72, 73 and 140 - Regulatory Improvements for Production and Utilization Facilities Transitioning to Decommissioning ML22138A1562022-04-29029 April 2022 Extension Request from Congresswoman Salud Carbajal on PR-20, 26, 50, 51, 52, 72, 73 and 140 - Regulatory Improvements for Production and Utilization Facilities Transitioning to Decommissioning ML21076A5332021-03-16016 March 2021 4 Form Comments from Citizens Opposing the Indian Point License Transfer Application (NRC-2020-0021) - (Version 2) ML21076A5302021-02-25025 February 2021 1 Form Comment from Citizen Opposing the Indian Point License Transfer Application (NRC-2020-0021) ML21076A5312021-02-23023 February 2021 Comment from Barbara and Edward O'Brien Re Indian Point Consideration of Approval of Transfer of Licenses & Conforming Amendments ML21076A5322021-02-23023 February 2021 Comment from Sandy Lehrenbaum Re Indian Point Consideration of Approval of Transfer of Licenses & Conforming Amendments on Indian Point ML21076A5292021-01-29029 January 2021 4 Form Comments from Riverkeeper Constituents to Commissioner Hanson Regarding the Indian Point License Transfer Application (NRC-2020-0021)- Subject: Fully Adjudicate All Pending Petitions ML19010A3082019-01-0909 January 2019 Comment from Amy Goldsmith on Behalf of Clean Water Action on Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station; Consideration of Approval of Transfer of License and Conforming Amendment ML19009A3262019-01-0707 January 2019 Comments from the Concerned Citizens of Lacey Coalition on Oyster Creek Nuclear Plant License Transfer NRC-2018-0017, Comment (063) of Patricia Gracian on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel2018-06-0505 June 2018 Comment (063) of Patricia Gracian on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18158A2792018-06-0505 June 2018 Comment (062) from Jonathan Adler on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18158A2772018-06-0505 June 2018 Comment (060) from Marion Sprin on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18158A2762018-06-0505 June 2018 Comment (070) from Daniel Dowden on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18158A2702018-06-0505 June 2018 Comment (064) from Mary Jo Poole on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18157A3792018-06-0505 June 2018 Comment (053) from Doris Pfalmer on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18157A3782018-06-0505 June 2018 Comment (052) from Carmela Price on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18157A3572018-06-0505 June 2018 Comment (044) from Sheryl Arruda on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18157A3622018-06-0505 June 2018 Comment (049) from Scott Chamberlin on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18157A3712018-06-0505 June 2018 Comment (054) from Joel Goldstein on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18157A3722018-06-0505 June 2018 Comment (055) from Paula Colby on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18157A3732018-06-0505 June 2018 Comment (056) from Irwin Sprin on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18157A3742018-06-0505 June 2018 Comment (057) from Arturo Torres on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18157A3562018-06-0404 June 2018 Comment (043) of Mary Steele on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18157A3642018-06-0404 June 2018 Comment (038) of Laura Lynch on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18157A3652018-06-0404 June 2018 Comment (039) of Berton Moldow on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18157A3662018-06-0404 June 2018 Comment (040) from Susan and David Dearing on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18157A3672018-06-0404 June 2018 Comment (041) of Anne Clorite on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18157A3682018-06-0404 June 2018 Comment (042) of Jo Panitch on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18157A3072018-06-0101 June 2018 Comment (035) of Anonymous Individual on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18157A2992018-06-0101 June 2018 Comment (034) from an Anonymous Individual on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18157A3002018-05-31031 May 2018 Comment (033) from Patricia Borchmann on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18150A6392018-05-29029 May 2018 Comment (029) from Donna Shanske on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18149A6012018-05-25025 May 2018 Comment (019) from Cord Bauer on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18094A7852018-04-0303 April 2018 Comment (003) from Ken Berg on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18094A7732018-04-0202 April 2018 Comment (002) from Ron Rodarte on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML18100A3522018-04-0202 April 2018 Comment (012) of Steve Schlesinger on the Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML16082A0072016-03-18018 March 2016 Comment (112) of Charles R. Langley on Behalf of Public Watchdogs on ANPR-26, 50, 52, 73, and 140 - Regulatory Improvements for Decommissioning Power Reactors ML16060A5112016-02-29029 February 2016 Comment (043) of Sara Kaminske on Behalf of Orange County, CA on ANPR-26, 50, 52, 73, and 140 - Regulatory Improvements for Decommissioning Power Reactors NRC-2011-0189, Comment (20) of Michel Lee on Behalf of the Indian Point Safe Energy Coalition on the Proposed Rule for 10 CFR Parts 50 and 52 - Mitigation of Beyond-Design-Basis Events2016-02-11011 February 2016 Comment (20) of Michel Lee on Behalf of the Indian Point Safe Energy Coalition on the Proposed Rule for 10 CFR Parts 50 and 52 - Mitigation of Beyond-Design-Basis Events ML16053A4532016-02-0101 February 2016 Comment (036) of Ron Roberts and Dianne Jacob on Behalf of the County of San Diego, CA, Board of Supervisors on ANPR-26, 50, 52, 73, and 140 - Regulatory Improvements for Decommissioning Power Reactors ML14017A1212014-01-16016 January 2014 Comment (00924) of Riverside Church on Behalf of 132 Individuals on PR-51, Waste Confidence - Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML14007A0082013-12-21021 December 2013 Comment (00856) of Julie Gibson on PR-51, Waste Confidence - Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML14006A4422013-12-20020 December 2013 Comment (00845) of G. Korsen on PR-51, Waste Confidence Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML14001A0052013-12-20020 December 2013 Comment (00736) of Valerie Burchfield Rhodes on PR-51, Waste Confidence - Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML14008A1702013-12-20020 December 2013 Comment (00820) of Jeannette Watson on PR-51, Waste Confidence - Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel ML14001A0572013-12-20020 December 2013 Comment (00786) of Alan Korsen on PR-51, Waste Confidence - Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel 2022-07-28
[Table view] |
Text
, MlV ,ta.
'1 s.IJUJ~JUI .l y II 1IllMV LU DI tl! d IJ I _ , Page 1 DoakDOCKETED USNRC From: "Martin Butcher" <mbutchergpsr.org> 64 January 28, 2005 14, 2004 (4:45pm)
To: <SECY nrc.gov> OFFICE OF SECRETARY Date: Mon, Jan 24, 2005 4:28 PM RULEMAKINGS AND
Subject:
Re: Support - Committee to Bridge the Gap petition ADJUDICATIONS STAFF January 24, 2005 Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Attention: Rule-making and Adjudication Staff Re: Support - Committee to Bridge the Gap petition
Dear Secretary,
I write on behalf of Physicians for Social Responsibility. Composed of over 30,000 medical professionals and supporters, we wish to express our deep concern about the possibility of terrorist events at the San Onofre and Diablo Canyon nuclear reactors, and the public health catastrophe that would ensue.
Two enormous vulnerabilities must quickly be addressed.
- 1. Spent fuel pools are vulnerable to land and air attack. For example, an excess of 2,500 tons of highly radioactive spent fuel assemblies reside at California's nuclear reactor sites. The buildings that house spent fuel rods are designed to remain Intact in case of an earthquake, but no provide no other security. At the Oyster Creek nuclear reactor site in New Jersey waste is stored in an unhardened waste pool built seven stories high above ground.
A strike in the waste pools at the Indian Point reactor in New York State could contaminate the metropolitan New York area, putting millions of people at risk of contamination, death, cancers and other conditions.The structures are typically light-duty. An airplane collision or coordinated land attack could drain the pools, destroy backup safety systems, and ignite the fuel.
The resulting fire would spew radioactivity into the environment in amounts in excess of the Chernobyl accident.
- 2. Spent fuel pools and operating reactors are acutely vulnerable to air attack. The appalling September 11th attack employed multiple airplanes focused on a single target. The containment vessels at all operating nuclear power plants should therefore be analyzed for withstanding the impact of multiple jumbo jetliners striking the same area of a containment dome. If the containment vessel or reactor core is breached and/or the plant's pumps and cooling systems are ever compromised, it could result in a Chernobyl-like accident - and could similarly lead to tens of thousands of cancer deaths.
Nuclear terrorism is not some radical far-fetched notion, but a terrible possibility. In the aftermath of the first World Trade Tower attack in 1992, police discovered in-depth plans to attack nuclear power facilities.
Further, Graham Allison, director of Harvard's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, writes in the best-seller, "Nuclear Terrorism," that "the American Airlines flight that struck the North Tower of the World Trade Center could just as readily have hit the Indian Point nuclear power plants
-renr&4,- SECY-7 SLAM
The Committee to Bridge the Gap petition offers constructive ideas on thwarting the two outstanding vulnerabilities at America's nuclear power plants. Inexpensive steel I-beams and cabling could obstruct an air attack.
And improving the Design Basis Threat to thwart a 9/1 1 type attack is surely reasonable.
If the NRC's cares about public health and sound science, we are confident that the commission will swiftly enact the petition.
Cordially Yours, Robert K. Musil Ph.D. MPH Executive Director and CEO, Physicians for Social Responsibility 1875 Connecticut Ave NW #101 2 Washington DC 20009 Tel: 202-667-4260 Fax: 202-667-4201 CC: CC:
<bmusil~psr.org>
I . ! ivir o..xtvmI p\WWVyvv vv I. I IVI i-'age 1I 1 FVaqe 1 Mail Envelope Properties (41F5687F.21E: 10: 8734)
Subject:
Re: Support - Committee to Bridge the Gap petition Creation Date: Mon, Jan 24, 2005 4:26 PM From: "Martin Butcher" <mbutcher@psr.org>
Created By: mbutcher@psr.org Recipients nrc.gov owf5-po.OWFNDO SECY (SECY) psr.org bmusil CC Post Office Route owf5_po.0WFNDO nrc.gov psr.org Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 3281 Monday, January 24, 2005 4:26 PM TEXT.htm 4600 Mime.822 9561 Options Expiration Date: None Priority: Standard Reply Requested: No Return Notification: None Concealed
Subject:
No Security: Standard