ML22006A101

Comment (158) E-mail Regarding Point Beach Draft SEIS

ML22006A101
Person / Time
Site:	Point Beach
Issue date:	01/03/2022
From:	Public Commenter Public Commenter
To:	Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
NRC/NMSS
References
86FR62220
Download: ML22006A101 (3)

Text

From: Theodora Tsongas <ttsongas@gmail.com>

Sent: Monday, January 3, 2022 11:51 PM To: PointBeach-SLRSEIS Resource

Subject:

[External_Sender] Comments for Docket ID: NRC-2020-0277-0194 Comments to Nuclear Regulatory Commission Re: Proposed renewal of Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-24 and DPR-27 for an additional 20 years of operation for Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 (Point Beach). NextEra Energy Point Beach, LLC; Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2.

Via email: PointBeach-SLRSEIS@nrc.gov Date: January 3, 2022 I am an environmental health scientist and epidemiologist with over 40 years experience evaluating the public health impacts of environmental pollution. I am commenting because of my concerns about the inadequacies of this process for encouraging public participation, and the apparent perpetuation of underestimates of the level of weakening of the structures of the aging power plants under consideration by the NRC, resulting in increases in the risks to the public, to public health, and to water sources serving great portions of the country.

The process by which the NRC has conducted the EIS has lacked transparency or a real attempt to encourage and consider the publics concerns or their understanding of what is or would be an unacceptable risk. Instead, the public is subjected to a convoluted process that appears to be intentionally discouraging to participation. It smacks of arrogance and a violation of the public trust.

Risks of failure of the structure of the reactor(s) must be evaluated in the most rigorous manner, as even a low probability failure can have an enormous adverse impact when we are considering the risks to human life and society for large populations. That is what is at risk here, not just a simple renewal of a permit to operate an industrial facility. The long term impacts of potential failure as well as the magnitude of impacts must be understood before allowing an aging facility or facilities to continue to operate. This EIS has not improved that understanding sufficiently to impose the risks on the public, especially in a process that lacks full disclosure to the public of the magnitude of risks the public is accepting in order to have access to necessary power resources.

Therefore, This SLRSEIS is unacceptable as a basis for renewing the operating license of the Point Beach Nuclear Plants 1 and 2, and must be revised to reflect the true magnitude of risk to the public of failures

of the structures or functioning of these nuclear plants. Furthermore, the process must be revised to properly respect and enable the publics right to full and complete understanding of the risks and tradeoffs they must accept to continue the operation of these nuclear plants.

Thank you for this opportunity to comment.

Theodora Tsongas, PhD, MS

Federal Register Notice: 86FR62220 Comment Number: 158 Mail Envelope Properties (FBBADC40-3F85-46B0-9C10-084FED17F1A9)

Subject:

[External_Sender] Comments for Docket ID: NRC-2020-0277-0194 Sent Date: 1/3/2022 11:50:31 PM Received Date: 1/3/2022 11:50:45 PM From: Theodora Tsongas Created By: ttsongas@gmail.com Recipients:

"PointBeach-SLRSEIS Resource" <PointBeach-SLRSEIS.Resource@nrc.gov>

Tracking Status: None Post Office: gmail.com Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 2752 1/3/2022 11:50:45 PM Options Priority: Normal Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date: