ML21322A333

Comment (25) E-mail Regarding WEC Cfff Draft EIS

ML21322A333
Person / Time
Site:	Westinghouse
Issue date:	11/18/2021
From:	Public Commenter Public Commenter
To:	Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
NRC/NMSS
References
86FR43277
Download: ML21322A333 (2)

Text

From: Stephen May <stephen.may1869@gmail.com>

Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2021 12:02 PM To: WEC_CFFF_EIS Resource

Subject:

[External_Sender] Please Deny the Westinghouse SC Campus Proposed 40 Year License Renewal To Whom It May Concern, I am writing today to voice my concerns about the proposed 40 year license renewal of the Westinghouse Nuclear Fuel Fabrication Facility, located near Columbia, SC. This facility, with its troubling history of environmental contamination, is located near the Congaree National Park, fragile wetlands and tributaries. Tributaries, which supply water and recreation for both people and wildlife in the area of the Westinghouse facility, and as far downstream as Charleston. I am concerned that given Westinghouses troubled past of environmental malfeasance, most notably its cover-ups related to radioactive contamination of groundwater, this facility simply cannot be trusted to operate in good faith.

As I understand it, the Environmental Impact Study stated that the contamination has not affected water and soil off of the Westinghouse campus. The notion that contaminants of any sort, let alone radioactive or carcinogenic agents, would respect the bounds of private property lines and thereby stay contained within the Westinghouse facility is absurd. How long before these contaminants leak into the neighboring, and fragile, wetlands and rivers (if they havent already done so)? How many citizens in the vicinity and downstream of this facility will be forced to endure adverse health conditions brought on by these contaminants? How much wildlife will be poisoned?

It has been said that there could be a national security implication to not renewing the license. That is to say that national security could be so threatened, by so much as one production facility going offline.

If this is true, then why have other production facilities not been created to ensure adequate supply in the event one or more facilities are unable to operate or produce? How is it that something so vital could have such a precarious supply? Such poor planning does not, in itself, reason to be in the best interest of national security, and seems a flimsy argument at best.

In summary, Westinghouses past actions have made it impossible for observant citizens, or any governmental entity, to continue to allow business as usual. They clearly cannot be trusted to be a good corporate citizen, or steward of the environment. In short, their credibility and esteem has evaporated.

Claims that the contaminants have not encroached upon surrounding property and homes, or affected the local water supply, are simply too farcical to believe. I urge you to not allow this permit to be issued. Westinghouses cavalier attitude toward the environment simply cannot continue to be ignored. Surely, there is another facility somewhere in the United States that is more suitable for production.

Sincerely, Stephen May Columbia, SC

Federal Register Notice: 86FR43277 Comment Number: 25 Mail Envelope Properties (CACTt-w2VFz=4XB3ULq=ggJWO8GyR6CRgmprnCetGrcvm0YVSsw)

Subject:

[External_Sender] Please Deny the Westinghouse SC Campus Proposed 40 Year License Renewal Sent Date: 11/18/2021 12:02:09 PM Received Date: 11/18/2021 12:03:02 PM From: Stephen May Created By: stephen.may1869@gmail.com Recipients:

"WEC_CFFF_EIS Resource" <WEC_CFFF_EIS.Resource@nrc.gov>

Tracking Status: None Post Office: mail.gmail.com Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 2801 11/18/2021 12:03:02 PM Options Priority: Normal Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date: