ML13358A426

Comment (00639) of Kim Stanick on PR-51, Waste Confidence - Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel

ML13358A426
Person / Time
Site:	San Onofre
Issue date:	12/19/2013
From:	Stanick K - No Known Affiliation
To:	NRC/SECY/RAS
SECY RAS
References
78FR56775 00639, NRC-2012-0246, PR-51
Download: ML13358A426 (3)

Text

1 Rulemaking1CEm Resource From: RulemakingComments Resource Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2013 9:46 AM To: Rulemaking1CEm Resource Cc: RulemakingComments Resource

Subject:

PR-51 Waste Confidence Attachments:

1124 stanick.pdf DOCKETED BY USNRC-OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY SECY-067 PR#: PR-51 FRN#: 78FR56775 NRC DOCKET#: NRC-2012-0246 SECY DOCKET DATE: 12/19/13 TITLE: Waste Confidence-Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel COMMENT#: 00639

Hearing Identifier: Secy_RuleMaking_comments_Public Email Number: 667 Mail Envelope Properties (377CB97DD54F0F4FAAC7E9FD88BCA6D0014433C49FE2)

Subject:

PR-51 Waste Confidence Sent Date: 12/24/2013 9:46:08 AM Received Date: 12/24/2013 9:46:08 AM From: RulemakingComments Resource Created By: RulemakingComments.Resource@nrc.gov Recipients: "RulemakingComments Resource" <RulemakingComments.Resource@nrc.gov>

Tracking Status: None "Rulemaking1CEm Resource" <Rulemaking1CEm.Resource@nrc.gov> Tracking Status: None Post Office: HQCLSTR01.nrc.gov

Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 254 12/24/2013 9:46:08 AM 1124 stanick.pdf 78841 Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date: Recipients Received:

Docket: NRC-2012-0246 Consideration of Environmental Impacts on Temporary Storage of Spent Fuel After Cessation of Reactor Operation Comment On:

NRC-2012-0246-0456 Waste Confidence - Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel; Extension of Comment Period Document:

NRC-2012-0246-DRAFT-1124 Comment on FR Doc # 2013-26726 Submitter Information Name: Kim Stanick Address: United States, Email: kimstanick@yahoo.com General Comment It is a ticking time bomb to have nuclear waste stored indefinitely in high seismic zones, in densely populated areas or on the coast. San Onofre is all, so it poses a triple threat. Fukushima has already taught us that the spread of radioactivity through the ocean is something that should be prevented, period. Storing waste at San Onofre is a HUGE toxic accident just waiting to happen that would cost hundreds of billions of dollars and would likely not be containable. Please act in the most responsible way possible and choose the surest and quickest path for PREVENTING any chance of a future problem by putting the waste in the most secure and advanced form of storage far away from oceans, people and seismic zones. History has proven that it is not safe to accept any level of risk, because now matter how conservatively we estimate tolerances and requirements, nature alwa y s exceeds our wildest estimates.

PUBLIC SUBMISSION As of: December 20, 2013 Received:

December 19, 2013 Status: Pending_Post Tracking No.

1jx-89dv-4je7 Comments Due:

December 20, 2013 Submission Type:

Web Pa ge 1of 1 12/20/2013 htt ps://www.fdms.

g ov/fdms-web-a g enc y/com p onent/contentstreamer?ob j ectId=09000064814cc1af&am

...