ML23139A073
| ML23139A073 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 01/13/2023 |
| From: | Logan C - No Known Affiliation |
| To: | Office of Administration |
| References | |
| NRC-2022-0183, 87FR76219 01422 | |
| Download: ML23139A073 (1) | |
Text
file:///G/...0Comments/NRC-2022-0183%20NEW/NRC-2022-0183%202023-04-05%2010-26-49_docs/NRC-2022-0183-DRAFT-1422.html[5/17/2023 12:17:41 PM]
PUBLIC SUBMISSION As of: April 05, 2023 Received: January 13, 2023 Status: Pending_Post Tracking No. lcu-usm4-boyk Comments Due: January 30, 2023 Submission Type: API Docket: NRC-2022-0183 Vistra Operations Company LLC Comanche Peak Power Company LLC Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 Comment On: NRC-2022-0183-0003 Notice of Intent To Conduct Scoping Process and Prepare Environmental Impact Statement; Vistra Operations Company LLC; Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 Document: NRC-2022-0183-DRAFT-1422 Comment on FR Doc # 2022-27025 Submitter Information Name: Christopher Logan Email:ctm_logan@yahoo.com General Comment RE: Docket ID NRC-2022-0183
Dear NRC:
Dont extend aging Comanche Peak nuclear licenses.
I urge you to reject the application by Vistra to extend the operating licenses for the Comanche Peak nuclear power reactors for an additional 20 years. To protect public health, safety, security, and financial health, the reactors should retire as licensed, on or before 2030 and 2033.
I request that in-person scoping meetings be held in Texas, as originally planned, when Covid risks subside. I request that a hearing opportunity be allowed for those seeking to intervene and that the deadline for requesting a hearing be postponed for 90 days past the current January 30 deadline.
Both an afternoon and evening public meeting were scheduled, but then postponed at the last moment, without adequate public notice. Four hours of in-person meeting time were reduced to only two hours online. There is now no evening opportunity to participate for people who work in the day, and not everyone can access online meetings. There will be no exhibits or opportunity to speak directly with NRC staff.
I am concerned about the increased safety and financial risks that would result from allowing another 20 years of Comanche Peak nuclear reactor operation. Risks from stress corrosion cracking, metal fatigue and embrittlement would all increase, and thereby increase accident risks and the potential for radiation releases. There are 7.76 million residents in nearby Dallas/Ft. Worth. Public health and safety should come first in this decision.
Scoping should consider that there is no need for 20 more years of nuclear power. Renewable solar and wind SUNSI Review Complete Template=ADM-013 E-RIDS=ADM-03 ADD: Tam Tran, Antoinette Walker-Smith, Ted Smith, Mary Neely Comment (1422)
Publication Date: 12/13/2022 Citation: 87 FR 76219
file:///G/...0Comments/NRC-2022-0183%20NEW/NRC-2022-0183%202023-04-05%2010-26-49_docs/NRC-2022-0183-DRAFT-1422.html[5/17/2023 12:17:41 PM]
generation are the most affordable and safest way to meet energy needs. Texas has abundant renewable resources to tap and a grid to move the power as needed.
Seismic concerns of both the reactors and the Squaw Creek Reservoir need to be re-examined in light of recent earthquake activity. Comanche Peak is within the Barnett Shale, a region with extensive fracking and numerous injection wells. There are fault lines in the area and a magnitude 3 earthquake had its epicenter only 20 miles from the site. The reservoir water contains radioactive tritium, and the integrity of the earthen dam must be included in the scoping, including the extent of inspections and past and anticipated impacts to the dam from seismic activity.
Please extend the deadline for intervention and host in-person meetings and hearings.
Nuclear waste (no, not Global Warming, not man's inhumanity to man) is the world's single most threatening condition. Human Life - like the Life of trees and fish and birds - cannot continue in the presence of high-level nuclear waste. Every nuclear plant produces this catastrophic waste, for which our best scientists have no plan for containment. Right now, it's being dumped in the desert of West Texas and eastern New Mexico, in cans rated for 100 years. Hundreds of centuries must pass before their contents are safe for biotic Life, and who will continually re-cask this waste without accident? What if civilization and its technology decline, as the Roman Empire disintegrated around 500 AD? What then, for the nuke waste? Right now it's held in over 500 locations around the world, and when it begins leaking, the surrounding areas will be contaminated. Advocates for the SMR would stash little nuke plants in the Amazon, the Arctic, in small towns across America, literally everywhere accessible by road, rail or water - and the companies anxious for energy would make their money and then abandon the nuke plants, as Texaco abandoned its oil mess in Ecuador. WE CANNOT AFFORD TO NUKE THE PLANET, EVEN IF WE "NEED THE ENERGY". Sure, it's tough to use less energy than before, but it can be done. By contrast, survival cannot be done in the presence of nuclear waste. Nukes = planetary death. Please turn your mandate from service to the nuclear industry, to service of humanity, and concentrate on protecting us from existing deadly waste, not the creation of more.
Thank you.