ML16053A515

Comment (037) of Emma Stamas on ANPR-26, 50, 52, 73, and 140 - Regulatory Improvements for Decommissioning Power Reactors

ML16053A515
Person / Time
Site:	Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png
Issue date:	02/17/2016
From:	Stamas E - No Known Affiliation
To:	NRC/SECY/RAS
References
80FR72358 00037, ANPR-140, ANPR-26, ANPR-50, ANPR-52, ANPR-73, NRC-2015-0070
Download: ML16053A515 (3)

Text

1 Rulemaking1CEm Resource From: RulemakingComments Resource Sent: Monday, February 22, 2016 3:44 PM To: Rulemaking1CEm Resource

Subject:

Comment on ANPR-26, 50, 52, 73, and 140 - Regulatory Improvements for

Decommissioning Attachments:

NRC-2015-0070-DRAFT-0037.pdfDOCKETED BY USNRC-OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY SECY-067 PR#: ANPR-26, 50, 52, 73, and 140 FRN#: 80FR72358 NRC DOCKET#: NRC-2015-0070 SECY DOCKET DATE: 2/22/16 TITLE: Regulatory Improvements for Decommissioning Power Reactors COMMENT#: 037

PUBLIC SUBMISSION As of: 2/22/16 2:37 PM Received:

February 17, 2016 Status: Pending_Post Tracking No.

1k0-8o0f-iwk9 Comments Due:

March 18, 2016 Submission Type:

Web Docket: NRC-2015-0070Regulatory Improvements for Power Reactors Transitioning to Decommissioning Comment On:

NRC-2015-0070-0007Regulatory Improvements for Decommissioning Power Reactors; Extension of Comment Period Document:

NRC-2015-0070-DRAFT-0037 Comment on FR Doc # 2015-32599 Submitter Information Name: Emma Stamas General CommentI live within 15 miles of the Vermont Yankee facility in Vernon,VT. Hundreds of my friends and relatives also live within 20 miles so we are all begging the NRC to make sure that the nuclear materials currently in spent fuel pools, are secured in dry casks as soon as possible. I am referring to NRC Docket ID NRC-2015-0070 Because the spent fuel pools are currently high above ground, the possiblity of leakage of cooling water

and damage to the system is much higher than it is in other locations. The facility is on a flood plane of a

majot river that has been and will continue to experience severe flooding and will course over the

decades.The rural nature of our area means that small plane traffic is not being carefully monitored or able to

be controled in an emergency and could crash into the spent fuel storage facilities causing a disaster far

beyond the dimensions of Flint Michigan.

Entergy just wants to spend as little as it can, without regard to the safety of the people who want to live out their lives and maintain farms and other businesses in this pristine part of the US. The NRC does not seem to

take its responsibility to protect us seriously.We were repeatedly promised by the NRC that this nuclear facility would be operated and shut down SAFELY. Now the NRC wants to change the shut down procedures and extend the risk of an accidental

release of nuclear materials so that ENtergy can spend less money from its decommisssioning fund. We paid

for this reactor and we paid for it to be decommissioned properly and safely through our utility fees and taxes.

This is not fair or safe! If proper decomissioning bankrupts the Entergy company that is their problem, not

ours.

Our problem is more serious: How can we be SURE that NO accidents can accur over the next several

thousand years? We are concerned about creating a disaster that could kill our grandchildren or their

greatgrandchildren long after Entergy and NRC decision makers are dead. Please strengthen the long term

storage of nuclear fuel and spent fuel regulations. We were told that these fuels would be stored in Yucca Page 1of 2 02/22/201 6 https://www.fdms.gov/fdms/getcontent?objectId=0900006481e725ee&format=xml&showorig=fals e

Mountain,but this is not going to happen any time soon. They must be stored MORE safely on site and it must be the top priority for the NRC to DEMAND this and OVERSEE it carefully.Page 2of 2 02/22/201 6 https://www.fdms.gov/fdms/getcontent?objectId=0900006481e725ee&format=xml&showorig=fals e

1 Rulemaking1CEm Resource From: RulemakingComments Resource Sent: Monday, February 22, 2016 3:44 PM To: Rulemaking1CEm Resource

Subject:

Comment on ANPR-26, 50, 52, 73, and 140 - Regulatory Improvements for

Decommissioning Attachments:

NRC-2015-0070-DRAFT-0037.pdfDOCKETED BY USNRC-OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY SECY-067 PR#: ANPR-26, 50, 52, 73, and 140 FRN#: 80FR72358 NRC DOCKET#: NRC-2015-0070 SECY DOCKET DATE: 2/22/16 TITLE: Regulatory Improvements for Decommissioning Power Reactors COMMENT#: 037

PUBLIC SUBMISSION As of: 2/22/16 2:37 PM Received:

February 17, 2016 Status: Pending_Post Tracking No.

1k0-8o0f-iwk9 Comments Due:

March 18, 2016 Submission Type:

Web Docket: NRC-2015-0070Regulatory Improvements for Power Reactors Transitioning to Decommissioning Comment On:

NRC-2015-0070-0007Regulatory Improvements for Decommissioning Power Reactors; Extension of Comment Period Document:

NRC-2015-0070-DRAFT-0037 Comment on FR Doc # 2015-32599 Submitter Information Name: Emma Stamas General CommentI live within 15 miles of the Vermont Yankee facility in Vernon,VT. Hundreds of my friends and relatives also live within 20 miles so we are all begging the NRC to make sure that the nuclear materials currently in spent fuel pools, are secured in dry casks as soon as possible. I am referring to NRC Docket ID NRC-2015-0070 Because the spent fuel pools are currently high above ground, the possiblity of leakage of cooling water

and damage to the system is much higher than it is in other locations. The facility is on a flood plane of a

majot river that has been and will continue to experience severe flooding and will course over the

decades.The rural nature of our area means that small plane traffic is not being carefully monitored or able to

be controled in an emergency and could crash into the spent fuel storage facilities causing a disaster far

beyond the dimensions of Flint Michigan.

Entergy just wants to spend as little as it can, without regard to the safety of the people who want to live out their lives and maintain farms and other businesses in this pristine part of the US. The NRC does not seem to

take its responsibility to protect us seriously.We were repeatedly promised by the NRC that this nuclear facility would be operated and shut down SAFELY. Now the NRC wants to change the shut down procedures and extend the risk of an accidental

release of nuclear materials so that ENtergy can spend less money from its decommisssioning fund. We paid

for this reactor and we paid for it to be decommissioned properly and safely through our utility fees and taxes.

This is not fair or safe! If proper decomissioning bankrupts the Entergy company that is their problem, not

ours.

Our problem is more serious: How can we be SURE that NO accidents can accur over the next several

thousand years? We are concerned about creating a disaster that could kill our grandchildren or their

greatgrandchildren long after Entergy and NRC decision makers are dead. Please strengthen the long term

storage of nuclear fuel and spent fuel regulations. We were told that these fuels would be stored in Yucca Page 1of 2 02/22/201 6 https://www.fdms.gov/fdms/getcontent?objectId=0900006481e725ee&format=xml&showorig=fals e

Mountain,but this is not going to happen any time soon. They must be stored MORE safely on site and it must be the top priority for the NRC to DEMAND this and OVERSEE it carefully.Page 2of 2 02/22/201 6 https://www.fdms.gov/fdms/getcontent?objectId=0900006481e725ee&format=xml&showorig=fals e