|
|---|
Category:General FR Notice Comment Letter
MONTHYEARML14364A0122014-12-22022 December 2014
Comment (00011) of Anonymous Individual on Southern California Edison Company; San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 and 3; Post-Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report
ML12032A0272011-12-19019 December 2011
Comment (4) of Raj Rana, on Behalf of Himself, on NUREG-1482, Rev 2, Appendix B
ML11354A1102011-12-14014 December 2011
Comment (74) of Lois Duvall & Faith Ruffing on Behalf of Themselves Supporting Draft Supplement 47 to the GEIS for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and Public Meetings for the License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11334A0682011-11-16016 November 2011
Comment (69) of Kris Watkins on Behalf of Tri-Cities Visitor & Convention Bureau, Supporting Draft Supplement 47 to Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station Operated by Energy Northwest
ML11325A3172011-11-16016 November 2011
Comment (60) of Thomas Buchanan, on Behalf of Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility, on Relicensing Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11325A1812011-11-16016 November 2011
Comment (62) of Theodora Tsongas Opposing Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants
ML11325A1822011-11-16016 November 2011
Comment (63) of Laurence Vernhes Opposing Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plant
ML11325A3152011-11-16016 November 2011
Comment (59) Jill Reifschneider Opposing Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and Public Meetings for the License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11325A3182011-11-16016 November 2011
Comment (61) of Allison O'Brien on Behalf of Us Dept of the Interior, on Re-licensing of Columbia Generating Station
ML11334A0692011-11-16016 November 2011
Comment (70) of Christine B. Reichgott on Behalf of Us Environmental Protection Agency, on Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Renewal of Columbia Generating Station License
ML11325A3102011-11-15015 November 2011
Comment (54) of Gerry Pollet, on Behalf of Heart of America, on Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and Public Meetings for the License Renewal of Columbia Generating Stati
ML11325A2462011-11-15015 November 2011
Comment (50) of Delbert Mccombs, Opposing Draft Supplement 47 to Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants & Public Meetings for License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11325A3082011-11-15015 November 2011
Comment (52) of Leslie March, on Behalf of the Sierra Club, Opposing Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and Public Meetings for the License Renewal of Columbia Generating
ML11325A3092011-11-15015 November 2011
Comment (53) of Janice Castle Opposing Relicensing of Columbia Generating Station
ML11325A1842011-11-15015 November 2011
Comment (65) by James W. Sanders on Behalf of Benton Pud, Supporting Renewal of the Columbia Generating Station
ML11325A1832011-11-15015 November 2011
Comment (64) of Julie Longenecker on Behalf of Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, on Draft Supplemental EIS for License Renewal of the Columbia Generating Station
ML11325A2472011-11-15015 November 2011
Comment (51) of Eric Adman, Opposing Draft Supplement 47 to Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and Public Meetings for License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11325A3132011-11-15015 November 2011
Comment (57) of Mary Twombly Opposing Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants
ML11325A3112011-11-15015 November 2011
Comment (55) of Chandra Radiance on Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and Public Meetings for the Licenses Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11325A3142011-11-15015 November 2011
Comment (58) of Charles Johnson, on Behalf of Himself, Opposing Relicensing of Columbia Generating Station
ML11325A3122011-11-15015 November 2011
Comment (56) of Hafiz Heartsun, on Behalf of Himself, Opposing Re-Licensing of Columbia River Generation Station
ML11325A2452011-11-14014 November 2011
Comment (49) of Susan Nash, Opposing NRC-2010-0029-0015, Notice of Availability of Draft Supplement 47 to Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and Public Meetings for License Renewal of Columbia Gener
ML11325A2442011-11-14014 November 2011
Comment (48) of Steven G Gilbert, on Behalf of Himself, Opposing License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11325A2432011-11-14014 November 2011
Comment (47) of Jacqueline Sorgen on Behalf of Himself Opposed to Notice of Receipt and Availability of Application for Renewal of Columbia Generating Station Facility Operating License
ML11325A2422011-11-12012 November 2011
Comment (46) of Louisa Hamachek, Opposing NRC-2010-0029-0015, Energy Northwest, Columbia Generating Station; Opposing Draft Supplement 47 to Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and Public Meetings
ML11325A1902011-11-10010 November 2011
Comment (66) of Michelle Caird on Behalf of Inland Power and Light Co., Supporting License Renewal of the Columbia Generating Station
ML11334A0662011-11-10010 November 2011
Comment (67) of Stephen Posner on Behalf of the State of Washington Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council on Columbia Generating Station Draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement - Supplement 47
ML11334A0702011-11-0808 November 2011
Comment (71) of Commissioners on Behalf of Mason County Pud Supporting Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and Public Meetings for the License Renewal of Columbia Generatin
ML11308A0302011-11-0101 November 2011
Comment (2) of Tom Clements on Behalf of Friends of the Earth, on Draft Strategic Plan About Testing of Plutonium Fuel (MOX) Made from Weapons-Grade Plutonium Required for NRC to License MOX Use in Boiling Water Reactors
ML11318A2562011-10-25025 October 2011
Comment (45) of William Gordon, Et. Al., on Behalf of Franklin Pud, Supporting Energy Northwest'S License Renewal for Columbia Generating Station
ML11305A0132011-10-19019 October 2011
Comment (43) of Henry T. Bernstein on Behalf of Himself, Opposing the Relicensing of the Columbia Generating Station
ML11305A0122011-10-18018 October 2011
Comment (42) of Diana Thompson on Behalf of Public Utility District No. 2 of Pacific County in Support of Energy Northwest'S Application to Renew Columbia Generating Station'S License for an Additional 25 Years
ML11291A1352011-10-16016 October 2011
Comment (38) of Linda on Behalf of Self Opposing the Renewal of Columbia Generating Station License
ML11293A0432011-10-13013 October 2011
Comment (41) of Leo Bowman, Shon Small & James Beaver on Behalf of Benton County, Wa, Board of Commissioners, Supporting the Relicensing of the Columbia Generating Station
ML11293A0422011-10-11011 October 2011
Comment (40) of the Board of Commissioners for Mason County Public Utility District, Supporting the Renewal of Columbia Generating Station'S Operating License for an Additional 20 Years
ML11291A1572011-10-0505 October 2011
Comment (37) of Ken S. Berg on Behalf of Us Dept of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, on Columbia Generating Station License Renewal Informal Consultation
ML11280A1162011-10-0404 October 2011
Comment (31) of Unknown Individual Opposing License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11280A1172011-10-0404 October 2011
Comment (32) of Scott Mcdonald on License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11280A1152011-10-0303 October 2011
Comment (30) of Holly Graham Re Draft Supplement 47 to Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11280A1102011-10-0101 October 2011
Comment (27) of Carol Hiltner Opposing Draft Supplement 47 to Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11280A1092011-09-30030 September 2011
Comment (26) of Kathleen Wahl on NRC-2010-0029, Energy Northwest, Columbia Generating Station; Notice of Availability of Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal
ML11280A1082011-09-30030 September 2011
Comment (25) of Martin Mijal Re Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11279A2462011-09-29029 September 2011
Comment (18) of Judy Ginn on Draft Supplement 47 to Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11280A2002011-09-29029 September 2011
Comment (22) of Theodora Tsongas Re Columbia Generating Station; Notice of Availability of Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal
ML11280A2032011-09-29029 September 2011
Comment (24) of Lonn Holman Re Draft Supplement 47 to Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11280A1202011-09-28028 September 2011
Comment (35) of Don C. Brunell, on Behalf of Association of Washington Business, Supporting License Renewal for Columbia Generating Station
ML11279A2412011-09-28028 September 2011
Comment (13) of Tom May Requesting Regional Hearings on the Draft EIS for Relicensing of Columbia Generating Station
ML11279A2432011-09-28028 September 2011
Comment (15) of Kathleen Bushman on NRC-2010-0029 - Energy Northwest, Columbia Generating Station; Notice of Availability of Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and Public
ML11279A2452011-09-28028 September 2011
Comment (17) of Anne Moore on NRC-2010-0029 - Energy Northwest, Columbia Generating Station; Notice of Availability of Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and Public Meetin
ML11279A2402011-09-28028 September 2011
Comment (12) of Gary Petersen of Tridec on NRC-2010-0029 - Energy Northwest, Columbia Generating Station; Notice of Availability of Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and
2014-12-22
[Table view] |
Text
HULKi.1. ECTN\ES Gallagher, Carol From: Sola' & Inayat [oneness@gorge.net]
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 7:21 PM To: Doyle, Daniel J, 9,? M 2: 46 Cc: markloper@hoanw.org; gerry@hoanw.org
Subject:
Testimony- EIS/hanford relicensing Dear Daniel I(>rI\i- '
Thanks for the opportunity for public testimony and comment on the potential relicensing of Hanford nuclear power station.
Unfortunately, the call in line is having difficulties, so I am writing comments as I sit here on hold. Given the unreliability of the phone in technology, perhaps it would be better to do local meetings as have been held before in Hood River. Even at the last Hood River meeting there was inadequate time to hear all comments and adequately address all questions. The public input appears to be getting marginalized. I assume the powers that be may not want to hear objections to their plans and the corporate sponsors profiting from Hanford and nuclear power would rather just get on with their plans and maximize shareholder dividends rather than waste time talking to individuals.
Anyway, given this email venue, I state that Hanford should not be relicensed. I did not participate in its construction as did the VIP who was allowed to cut in line before the presentation period.
Whatever his qualifications and however positive his regard is of the plant, it does not override physics, the inevitability of human error and extreme natural events. Similarly confident individuals built Fukushima, Chernobyl, 3 Mile Island, as well as the Challenger, Apollo 13, the Tacoma Narrows bridge, dropped conference calls and any number of failed engineering endeavors. It is noble to strive to overcome failure but it is foolish to believe it can be eliminated. Disaster will continue to happen and no one can predict how or when or what.
There will continue to be deaths and damage as the shadow side of our technological progress. However, this inevitability is not an excuse for corporate/ governmental denial of responsibility. The clear dangers of radioactive contamination following nuclear power plant failures is demonstrated by "dead zones" around Chernobyl and Fukushima. "Safe" and "clean" power plants do not explode and make large areas uninhabitable for centuries. Boiling water with toxic radioactivity is not a reasonable or responsible choice given the risks of catastrophic failure, which is inevitable somewhere, sometime.
I also take issue with the claim that nuclear power is economical.
This view does not take into account the decommissioning costs of obsolete plants, clean up of catastrophic disasters, as well as the still unresolved waste disposal issue. It seems to me that the EIS should include these inevitable long term costs. Note Trojans economic debacle, certainly there were political harrasment factors, but the failed steam reactor alone would have been sufficient to shut it down.
Trojan was a big win for PGE and a major loss for the ratepayers. Add up the whole mess and how much did we pay per kilowatt?
I also take issue with the belief that nuclear power is "green".
Certainly it is "carbon-free". It is also "calorie-free". This superficial green-ness masks the black-ness of high-level radioactive waste both as part of the as designed fuel cycle and the possibility of accidental or catastrophic releases. Certainly nuclear power can be construed to be superior to coal or wind or solar by comparing certain statistics. This does not make nuclear clean. The major advantage nuclear does have is a powerful political lobby and corporate cabal to spin the media and legislation in favor of it's continued profits.
Solar and other technologies are lagging behind nuclear in their ability to provide adequate electricity because research and development funds were slashed when Reagan took the solar panels off the white house in 1980. The big picture is that we need to catch up and phase over to less toxic and dangerous forms of power generation, not put all our eggs in the nuclear basket and arrogantly believe that a Fukushima or Chernobyl "can't happen here." ,A2: i"-
ý5c k--'32- 1 . 27-
I am concerned about reports of NRC weakening safety standards in order to "safely" relicense nuclear power plants. This is making nuclear power less expensive in the short term, and increasing the likelihood of accidents in the long term.
Hanford has provide employment and safety to the community. It is to be praised for that blessing to the community. However, it does not insure Hanford will never have an error.
Blessings Hafiz Heartsun 3226 Dee Hwy Hood River, Or.97031 541-354-3633 2
