ML24198A176
| ML24198A176 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 07/11/2024 |
| From: | Doenmez S - No Known Affiliation |
| To: | Office of Administration |
| References | |
| NRC-2024-0076, 89FR53659 00010 | |
| Download: ML24198A176 (1) | |
Text
PUBLIC SUBMISSION As of: 7/16/24, 1:15 PM Received: July 11, 2024 Status: Pending_Post Tracking No. lyh-mu0h-bops Comments Due: July 29, 2024 Submission Type: Web Docket: NRC-2024-0076 Notice of Intent to Conduct Scoping Process and Prepare an Environmental Assessment Holtec Decommissioning International, LLC and Holtec Palisades, LLC; Palisades Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 Comment On: NRC-2024-0076-0001 Holtec Decommissioning International, LLC, and Holtec Palisades, LLC; Palisades Nuclear Plant; Notice of Intent To Conduct Scoping Process and Prepare an Environmental Assessment Document: NRC-2024-0076-DRAFT-0010 Comment on FR Doc # 2024-14112 Submitter Information Name: Sarah Doenmez Address:
Dublin, NH, 03444 Email:sdoenmez@dublinschool.org Phone:16035631296 General Comment In regards to Docket ID NRC-2024-0076, I agree with the following statements:
SMR-300s are not small. They are 4.5 times larger than Big Rock Points previous reactor one of the worst radioactive polluters in the entire country, despite its relatively small, 67-MWe size. Fermi Unit 1, also a relatively small 67-MWe, partially melted down on October 5, 1966 and we almost lost Detroit. As Holtec CEO Krishna Singh himself has pointed out, the two SMR-300s at Palisades would nearly double the nuclear mega-wattage on the 432-acre site (800 MWe + 600 MWe). This would represent a very concentrated amount of nuclear risk and radioactive environmental impact on the tiny site.he environmental impacts at the nearly 60-year old zombie reactor cannot legally be segmented from the environmental impacts at the SMR-300 new builds. These are not only radiological but also physical.
For example, the construction of two 300-MWe reactors on the tiny, 432-acre Palisades site would wreak further havoc with the fragile, endangered forested dunes ecosystem there. It would also threaten Indigenous cultural properties very likely located there, including sacred ancestral burial sites.The closure-for-good of Palisades by Entergy on May 20, 2022 meant that no more radioactive waste would be generated there. But the proposed restart would mean that the highly radioactive waste inventory stored on-site at Palisades would grow by around 15 metric tons per year, from 2025 to 2051. Thus, the associated LARGE impacts on the environment would also grow. Holtecs proposed SMR-300 new builds at Palisades (and also at Big Rock Point), due to loss of economy of scale, would each generate more highly radioactive waste, per unit of electricity generated, than the zombie reactor. Drs. Allison Macfarlane, and Rodnew Ewing, President Obamas NRC chair and U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board chair, respectively, reported recently that, depending on their specific design, SMRs will generate 2 to 30 times the radioactive waste, as compared to current reactors, per unit of electricity 7/16/24, 1:16 PM blob:https://www.fdms.gov/b515c217-cfd7-4d2a-9dec-d2cf455f5a69 blob:https://www.fdms.gov/b515c217-cfd7-4d2a-9dec-d2cf455f5a69 1/2 SUNSI Review Complete Template=ADM-013 E-RIDS=ADM-03 ADD: Laura Willingham, Mary Richmond, Antoinette Walker-Smit, Jessica Hammock, Marlayna Doell, Mary Neely Comment (10)
Publication Date:6/27/2024 Citation: 89 FR 53659
generated. But similar things can be said regarding thermal wastewater discharges, cost per unit of electricity generated, etc. Thus, Holtecs SMR new build schemes would exacerbate its zombie reactor restart scheme.
i steadfastly oppose the idea of building SMRs at the site of lake Michigan, a national treaure which cannot be further endangered by radioactive contamination.
Sincerely, Sarah Doenmez 18 Lehmann Way Dubl;in, NH 03444 7/16/24, 1:16 PM blob:https://www.fdms.gov/b515c217-cfd7-4d2a-9dec-d2cf455f5a69 blob:https://www.fdms.gov/b515c217-cfd7-4d2a-9dec-d2cf455f5a69 2/2