ML090700177
| ML090700177 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 03/10/2009 |
| From: | Public Commenter Public Commenter |
| To: | Division of License Renewal |
| NRC/NRR/DLR | |
| References | |
| 73FR80440 | |
| Download: ML090700177 (3) | |
Text
1 IPRenewalCEmails From:
Ellen Weininger [eeweininger@gmail.com]
Sent:
Tuesday, March 10, 2009 4:20 PM To:
IndianPointEIS Resource
Subject:
re: Indian Point Draft EIS Sent by email: March 10, 2009 Chief, Rules Review and Directives Branch U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop TWB-05-B01 Washington, DC 20555-0001
Dear Panel:
The Draft EIS fails to properly and fully evaluate the long-term and cumulative effects upon human health of the planned and unplanned releases of radiation into the air, soil, groundwater and Hudson River. The Draft EIS further completely fails to look at the impact upon human health of the synergistic interactions of such radiation with other known toxins which are known to have been released into the regional environment, most notably the PCBs and mercury in the Hudson River.
The Draft EIS utterly and appallingly ignores the impact upon the environment and human health of keeping spent fuel and other nuclear waste on site indefinately. The evidence available strongly supports the conclusion that the Indian Point site will, de facto, become a high level nuclear waste dump for the foreseeable future.
Exposure to certain environmental toxins has been linked to a growing list of health problems in children, including cancer, certain types of birth defects and developmental disabilities. Children are being exposed to an increasing number of toxins in utero, as infants and as growing children. Due to various physiological and behavioral factors, children are uniquely vulnerable to these toxins and permanent adverse health effects may result from exposure during critical windows of physiological development.
The Draft EIS fails to analyze seismic hazards. This is a manifest dereliction of the NRCs duty, especially in light of recent seismic activity in the region and recent studies conducted by Columbia Universitys Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory which specifically note the potential threat to Indian Point.
The cost/benefit analysis of the Draft EIS is incomplete and inadequate and constitutes a violation of NEPA. It relies upon the preposterous conclusion that a major nuclear accident need not be of concern, and even if one occurred, it would not have a significant effect on the environment or public health. This flies in the face of the United States governments (including the NRCs) own former analyses. The NRC must include the postulation of a major radioactive release -- the including the possibility of a meltdown and spent fuel fire - in its cost/benefit analysis.
The Draft EIS is defective in neglecting to evaluate the environmental risks inherent in the realities that the operator and the NRC have acknowledged that it is not feasible to fully inspect the fuel pools, the buried and embedded piping, critical electrical wiring, or the dome, where rust has already been detected.
The Draft EIS is defective in neglecting to evaluate the environmental risks inherent in an aging nuclear facility which has already demonstrably shown signs of deterioration. The NRCs disregard of aging as a separate crucial factor, and its reliance upon aging management as a failsafe for finding all potentially critical problems, not only flies in the face of standard engineering risk analysis, but is belied by the actual experience at the plant.
The Draft EIS is defective in neglecting to evaluate the environmental risks created by the fireproofing exemptions given by the NRC to Indian Point.
The Draft EIS is inadequate, incomplete, and cursory and fails to evaluate the options for obtaining electricity by clean, sustainable forms of energy (e.g., through solar, wind, geothermal, small hydro) or for dramatically reducing consumption (e.g., through efficiency technologies, reducing energy waste, and green buildings). The final EIS must properly evaluate the No Action Alternative.
The failure of the NRC to acknowledge the above is wreckless and ill-advised and represents a complete disregard of the NRC mandate to protect human health and the environment and strongly suggests that the Draft EIS is merely a rubberstamp for Indian Points relicensing. Substantial evidence of harm must be the trigger for action to protect innocent lives and to reject Indian Point's
2 application for relicensing.
Sincerely, Ellen Weininger White Plains, New York 10606
Federal Register Notice:
73FR80440 Comment Number:
36 Mail Envelope Properties (7474d5cd0903101320k5db78e32kbe726fbbb905a805)
Subject:
re: Indian Point Draft EIS Sent Date:
3/10/2009 4:20:29 PM Received Date:
3/10/2009 4:20:31 PM From:
Ellen Weininger Created By:
eeweininger@gmail.com Recipients:
"IndianPointEIS Resource" <IndianPoint.EIS@nrc.gov>
Tracking Status: None Post Office:
mail.gmail.com Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 4242 3/10/2009 4:20:31 PM Options Priority:
Standard Return Notification:
No Reply Requested:
No Sensitivity:
Normal Expiration Date:
Recipients Received: