ML12256B018
| ML12256B018 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 09/11/2012 |
| From: | Kerr R - No Known Affiliation |
| To: | NRC/SECY/RAS |
| SECY RAS | |
| References | |
| 50-247-LR, 50-286-LR, ASLBP 07-858-03-LR-BD01, RAS E-821 | |
| Download: ML12256B018 (1) | |
Text
k-As E-g2-Docket, Hearing From:
Roger Kerr [rogerq@optonline. net]
Sent:
Tuesday, September 11, 2012 9:43 AM To:
Docket, Hearing; Siarnacki, Anne
Subject:
Please do not renew the operating license for Indian Point After listening to all sides in the upcoming hearings, I urge you to vote against renewing the operating license for Indian Point. Given the age of the plant, the existing risks from the stored waste and the existing ecological problems with the plant (which have not been given enough attention), I do not believe the benefits of the electrical power from this plant outweigh the dangers.
Given the expected life of the plant at the time it was built, and with the number of problems seen in Indian Point and other Entergy-owned nuclear plant around the US, a 20 year extension places those of use living near the plant in too much danger. I grant that the risks of a major disaster are small, but the impact on people's lives, the economy and the environment should a disaster occur are just too great. We usually speak only about major disasters, but the difficulty of maintaining an aging plant -- maintaining it beyond its designed life expectancy -- for smaller disasters is just too great.
As you know, should the worst happen, there is no reasonable way for local residents to safely evacuate.
Although I live outside the immediate area of the plant, evacuation in the event of a major disaster would be effectively impossible. The traffic jams that would occur would make the worst of the Chinese traffic jams look like a picnic in comparison.
To me the biggest problem with renewing the plant's license is the storage of the waste. The storage facilities are currently inadequate, and given the crowding that already exists I don't believe there will be a safe way to store additional waste over the life of a licensing extension.
The other issue which leads me to oppose the renewal is the fact that Entergy is currently in violation of the clean water act. You may not care about the aquatic life that is impacted, but you should care about the company's willingness to ignore existing law. If they are willing to break this law, what other laws will they be willing to break when the pressure gets too great?
Thank you for your consideration during your review process.
Roger Q. Kerr DOCKETED USNRC September 11, 2012 (9:43 a.m.)
OFFICE OF SECRETARY RULEMAKINGS AND ADJUDICATIONS STAFF 0
k'bs
-0 Z1