ML24058A007

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Comment (7) of Kermit Kubitz on Notice of Intent to Conduct Scoping Process and Prepare Environmental Impact Statement; Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2
ML24058A007
Person / Time
Site: Diablo Canyon  Pacific Gas & Electric icon.png
Issue date: 02/23/2024
From: Kubitz K
- No Known Affiliation
To:
Office of Administration
References
NRC-2023-0192, 89FR4631 00007
Download: ML24058A007 (1)


Text

2/26/24, 2:19 PM blob:https://www.fdms.gov/661d305f-1616-4e01-978e-e9f10b7b15cd SUNSI Review Complete Template=ADM-013 As of: 2/26/24, 2:19 PM E-RIDS=ADM-03 Received: February 23, 2024 ADD: Kim Conway, Status: Pending_Post PUBLIC SUBMISSIONAntoinette Walker-Smith, Mary Neely Tracking No. lsz-lnfz-ku9k Comment (7) Comments Due: February 23, 2024 Publication Submission Type: Web Date:1/24/2024 Citation: 89 FR 4631 Docket: NRC-2023-0192 Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2

Comment On: NRC-2023-0192-0003 Notice of Intent To Conduct Scoping Process and Prepare Environmental Impact Statement; Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2

Document: NRC-2023-0192-DRAFT-0007 Comment on FR Doc # 2024-01355

Submitter Information

Name: Kermit Kubitz Address:

San Francisco, CA, 94127 Email: mesondk@yahoo.com Phone: 415-412-4393

General Comment

The NRC should consider a combined benefit risk analysis of any continued operation of Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2 comprised, in summary form of

1. Proposed action
2. Alternatives - including closure, additional safety recommendations, and the proposed extension
3. Benefits of the proposed action, incuding the environmental benefits as described in other comments of reduced carbon emissions from the alternative sources of electricity if Diablo Canyon is not available.
4. Risks of the proposed action, including any measure to mitigate those risks.
5. A summary weighing of environmental benefits and risks and a net conclusion based on all the available information, including any proposed modification. For example, one proposed modification could be to shut down or lower power at the plant in the event of any nearby magnitude 5 or more earthquake which could be a precursor to a lar ger earthquake.

blob:https://www.fdms.gov/661d305f-1616-4e01-978e-e9f10b7b15cd 1/1