ML090771345

Comment (83) E-mail Regarding Iplr Dseis

ML090771345
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	03/16/2009
From:	Public Commenter Public Commenter
To:	Division of License Renewal
NRC/NRR/DLR
References
73FR80440
Download: ML090771345 (2)

Text

IPRenewalCEmails From: Marie Inserra [minsjsul@yahoo.com]

Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 8:13 AM To: IndianPointEIS Resource

Subject:

critically inadequate IP environmental report, second transmission with corrections I am writing to urge that Entergy not be granted a renewal of the license for the Indian Point Nuclear Power

Plant, I am urging this based on the grounds that the environmental report is critically inadequate.

The report which does a wonderful job of describing the topology and the surrounding flora and fauna of the plant does not at all describe the geology of the underlying rock in the area. There is no mention as as far as I can tell that the plant sits on a major fault line.

In addition no where in the report is there an analysis of the type of rock and its ability to fracture and conduct surface water to ground water. This is vitally important given the fact the Indian Point continues to leak water that contains cesium, strontium and tritium.

It is ironic that it is not mentioned given that at several NRC sponsored meetings that I have attended Entergy officials have been allowed to portray the underlying rock as if it was a stainless steel bowl with the radioactive water merely running off to be diluted in the Hudson.

Finally it is clear with the court decisions about Yucca Mountain that any sort of solution to the nuclear waste generated by these power plants is decades off. This is especially true since Yucca mountain is already contractually full and it will not be able to take any waste generated by the Indian Point renewal.

What is becoming more apparent is that any waste generated by the renewal of the license will sit on this property for decades if not hundreds of years and will be the problem of the surrounding communities as the infrastructure of the plant further decays. To limit the scope of the report to the renewal period is to overlook the probable and real damage that these plants will do to the surrounding environment.

For these reasons I find the NRC environmental report critically inadequate and urge the NRC to reject the environmental report until these issues are fully explored.

John Sullivan, 735 Requa Street, Peekskill, New York sent second time with corrections. js.

1

Federal Register Notice: 73FR80440 Comment Number: 83 Mail Envelope Properties (195386.39872.qm)

Subject:

critically inadequate IP environmental report, second transmission with corrections Sent Date: 3/16/2009 8:13:21 AM Received Date: 3/16/2009 8:13:23 AM From: Marie Inserra Created By: minsjsul@yahoo.com Recipients:

"IndianPointEIS Resource" <IndianPoint.EIS@nrc.gov>

Tracking Status: None Post Office: web110104.mail.gq1.yahoo.com Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 2090 3/16/2009 8:13:23 AM Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date:

Recipients Received: