ML090720680
| ML090720680 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 03/11/2009 |
| From: | Public Commenter Public Commenter |
| To: | Division of License Renewal |
| NRC/NRR/DLR | |
| References | |
| 73FR80440 | |
| Download: ML090720680 (4) | |
Text
1 IPRenewalCEmails From:
Jennifer Gray [jdabal@ramapo.edu]
Sent:
Wednesday, March 11, 2009 6:22 PM To:
Andrew Stuyvenberg Cc:
medelste@ramapo.edu Attachments:
To Mr andrew letter revised final letter.docx Drew Stuyvenberg Project Manager U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission att andrew: comment letter attachment
Federal Register Notice:
73FR80440 Comment Number:
66 Mail Envelope Properties (20090311182152.BDR74539)
Subject:
Sent Date:
3/11/2009 6:21:52 PM Received Date:
3/11/2009 6:22:00 PM From:
Jennifer Gray Created By:
jdabal@ramapo.edu Recipients:
"medelste@ramapo.edu" <medelste@ramapo.edu>
Tracking Status: None "Andrew Stuyvenberg" <Andrew.Stuyvenberg@nrc.gov>
Tracking Status: None Post Office:
msg-1.mail.ramapo.edu Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 112 3/11/2009 6:22:00 PM To Mr andrew letter revised final letter.docx 19605 Options Priority:
Standard Return Notification:
No Reply Requested:
No Sensitivity:
Normal Expiration Date:
Recipients Received:
4 1041 user.jdabal Drew Stuyvenberg Project Manager U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission My name is Jennifer Gray and I am a senior at Ramapo College of NJ. I am in the Environmental Program and wish to submit the following comments. In regards to the draft DSEIS Supplement 38 for the license renewal that is written for Indian Point, I feel it does not have all of the information needed to be able to make a confident decision to relicense Indian Points operating permits for another 20 years.
First, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission only considers the threat of earthquakes during initial licensing hearings and does not revisit the issue during relicensing. Scientists can use the data to issue reports, but the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission cannot use it to determine whether the plant should have its license renewed. This issue should be reconsidered for revision because a great deal more of information on earthquakes and seismic activity has become available since the hazard analysis, which was performed decades ago, regarding the risk of damage to Indian Point posed by seismic activity. Furthermore, studies by officials at Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory show that the nuclear power plant closest to America's largest city is more likely to be hit by an earthquake than previously thought because it sits atop a newly identified intersection of two active seismic zones. New research suggests that damaging earthquakes could nucleate at a shallower depth than previously thought. While the probability of a damaging earthquake may be low, damage to the nuclear plants at Indian Point may have dire secondary consequences for the region. An updated seismic hazard analysis is urgently needed!
Furthermore, if relicensing is granted what would happen to the leaks from Indian Point 1 that has been shut down but has not been fully addressed? For instance, when IP1 was permanently shut down it was stated that all spent fuel was removed. However, it seems this hazardous waste is just being left in long-term storage. Entergys plan to entirely decommission this waste is not expected until Indian Point 2 is decommissioned; therefore the issues and concerns at Indian point 1 will be left untaken care of for another 20 years.
Lastly, nuclear fuel reprocessing/recycling is a believed to be a safe activity that should be part of America's nuclear energy program. It can be affordable and is technologically feasible.
The material being stored at Indian Point as waste right now is more than 99% recyclable into usable material. Because Indian Point does not recycle any of the used material as of now, this nuclear plants costs hundreds of times more than operation costs in Europe or Japan where they do recycle theirs. The issue about recycling nuclear waste is not adequately addressed in the
DSEIS and studies need to be done by a third party to bring the United States one step closer to fulfilling our responsibility to future generations; to deal with spent fuel and high-level radioactive waste on a permanent, not temporary basis before a license renewal takes place.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely, Jennifer Gray