ML20267A643
| ML20267A643 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | HI-STORE |
| Issue date: | 09/22/2020 |
| From: | Public Commenter Public Commenter |
| To: | NRC/NMSS/DREFS |
| NRC/NMSS/DREFS | |
| References | |
| 85FR16150 | |
| Download: ML20267A643 (3) | |
Text
From: Sasha Pyle <sasha@visiblearts.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 12:29 PM To: Holtec-CISFEIS Resource Cc: Caverly, Jill; Imboden, Stacey
Subject:
[External_Sender] Docket ID NRC-2018-0052 public comment Public comment re: Docket ID NRC-2018-0052 Sept. 22, 2020 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued a Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Holtec interim waste disposal project that utterly fails to meet its mandate.
New Mexico has long hosted toxic industrial and military experiments that have taken a breathtaking toll on the health of its residents, notably communities of color. Adding to that list with a poorly-conceived, politically expedient waste disposal project that neither addresses safe disposal nor protects populations and resources would be a tragic mistake.
I am particularly galled by the flawed concept of interim storage that depends on some entity in the future to come back and remove the waste decades later. I do not have faith in any government agency, corporate interest, or collaboration between the two to honor this plan.
Instead I see the waste languishing and leaking. I do not consent to this vision for our state! We are not the throwaway lands, the sacrifice zone, the poor state that will say yes to any toxic experiment in the name of job creation. (Incidentally, this project creates laughably scant employment for that tired argument to be trotted out again.)
The DEIS should, to comply with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act, have fully addressed cumulative impacts on health and resources from decades of sloppy nuclear-materials practices. As citizens, we have educated ourselves about: the Rio Puerco tailings spill; Trinity detonation long-term exposure in the Tularosa Basin; Native uranium miners health problems never addressed nor their ruined lands compensated for; contemporary (and inevitable future) releases from WIPP; decades of liquid effluent from LANL weapons production sucked up into the trees in the canyons surrounding Los Alamos and released as airborne contamination during the Cerro Grande and Las Conchas fires; contaminants released from Kirtland Air Force Base and the Mixed Waste Landfill into the aquifer which serves Albuquerque, our most populous city; the list goes on and on. Recently we have learned of radioactive wastewater from fracking operations being used for dust control on roads that people unknowingly drive over, adding to their lifetime exposure.
The DEIS should have fully investigated the risks of rail transportation of the waste from spent fuel rods across numerous states. These risks would obviously include accidents, container failure, terrorism, or weather events. The damage to our environment, wildlife, cultural resources and economy can hardly be estimated were a breach to occur during transportation.
Why should New Mexicans be singled out for this abuse to our health and our precious resources? Bringing another 173,600 metric tons of high-level radioactive waste here under false pretensesnamely the unprovable assurance that it will be removed at some later datewould
demonstrate to us again that poor states with high minority populations have no voice in environmental decisions.
Do the letters NRC stand for Nuclear Rubberstamp Cronies? Or do you take your job descriptions seriously enough to recognize the consequences of siting and approving an unproven facility design like that proposed for Holtec? While everyday Americans are struggling to survive and work during a pandemic, your taxpayer-funded salaries still come with job requirements. Those requirements were not met by the shoddy DEIS that you offered the public.
I know for a fact that you have received well over a dozen comments from the exemplary non-profit group Beyond Nuclear this year addressing different aspects of this proposed facility and this Environmental Impact Statement. I have read those comments, and done a great deal of additional research, to understand the technical and environmental parameters. I urge you to give close consideration to the comments submitted by Beyond Nuclear, Southwest Research and Information Center, Nuclear Watch New Mexico, Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety, CARD and other groups working in the public interest on nuclear issues. The number of NGOs working on these issues should tell you that we are keenly aware of the threats to our land, air, water, historic cultural resources, and future posed by transporting and storing spent-fuel-rod waste here.
I will close with an excerpt from Beyond Nuclears excellent comments:
Finally, under current U.S. law, this project is illegal. The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as Amended, does not allow the federal government to take title to the high-level radioactive waste (commercial irradiated nuclear fuel) until a permanent geologic repository is operating. So the federal government cannot pay for transportation and storage of the waste as Holtec wants.
Legally, the license cannot be issued until a permanent repository is operating.
Deny this license. Its time to defer to the current thinking of most informed nuclear scientists:
that on-site storage, suitably protected, places the public at far lower risk than transporting waste across the country to an unsound facility.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sasha Pyle Santa Fe NM 505-988-9210 sasha@visiblearts.com
Federal Register Notice: 85FR16150 Comment Number: 4378 Mail Envelope Properties (83843165-55CC-403D-91DC-8DABBA141B3C)
Subject:
[External_Sender] Docket ID NRC-2018-0052 public comment Sent Date: 9/22/2020 12:29:05 PM Received Date: 9/22/2020 12:55:56 PM From: Sasha Pyle Created By: sasha@visiblearts.com Recipients:
Post Office: visiblearts.com Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 5282 9/22/2020 12:55:56 PM Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date:
Recipients Received: