ML24212A269

Comment (98) of Kathleen Dalhoff on 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

ML24212A269
Person / Time
Site:	Palisades
Issue date:	07/29/2024
From:	Dalhoff K - No Known Affiliation
To:	Office of Administration
References
89FR53659 00098, NRC-2024-0076
Download: ML24212A269 (1)

Text

From: Stacy Schumann To: Barbara Blount

Subject:

RE: Palisades letter to NRC about Power Plant Date: Monday, July 29, 2024 1:55:19 PM

Eight so far.

SUNSI Review Complete Template=ADM-013 E-RIDS=ADM-03 Kind regards, ADD: Laura Willingham, Mary Richmond, Antoinette Walker-Smith, Marlayna Doell, Mary

-Stacy Neely

Comment (98)

Regulations Specialist Publication Date:6/27/2024 Legal Research Center Citation: 89 FR 53659 Office of the General Counsel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission OWFN/15-LRC; Phone: (301) 415-0624

From: Barbara Blount <Barbara.Blount@nrc.gov>

Sent: Monday, July 29, 2024 1:54 PM To: Stacy Schumann <Stacy.Schumann@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Palisades letter to NRC about Power Plant

How many do you have?

From: Stacy Schumann <Stacy.Schumann@nrc.gov>

Sent: Monday, July 29, 2024 1:53 PM To: Kathleen Dalhoff < katiedalhoff@gmail.com>

Subject:

RE: Palisades letter to NRC about Power Plant

Good afternoon,

Thank you for your comment regarding the Federal Register notice, Holtec Decommissioning International, LLC, and Holtec Palisades, LLC; Palisades Nuclear Plant; Notice of Intent To Conduct Scoping Process and Prepare an Environmental Assessment, (89 FR 53659 ). Your comment will be processed and available for public viewing on Regulations.gov in 10 business days (NRC-2024-0076).

Thank you!

Kind regards,

-Stacy

Regulations Specialist Legal Research Center Office of the General Counsel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission OWFN/15-LRC; Phone: (301) 415-0624

From: Kathleen Dalhoff < katiedalhoff@gmail.com>

Sent: Monday, July 29, 2024 11:06 AM To: Stacy Schumann < Stacy.Schumann@nrc.gov>

Subject:

[External_Sender] Palisades letter to NRC about Power Plant

Email to Stacy.Schumann@nrc.gov

Dear Ms. Schumann and others-

My parents bought a cottage in Palisades Park back in 1978 so that our family could gather together and create memories. Our family is 192 strong. I tell you this because it matters. There are 192 people behind this email asking you to NOT let Holtec reopen the Palisades Nuclear Power Plant.

My mom is 94 and is so excited to go up to Palisades in August. Our family has spent the last 46 summers gathering together from several different states and the most popular weeks are the weeks when everyone is there. We could choose weeks where there are less people but we CHOOSE to be together to create lasting memories.

Palisades is a very special place to us. I live in NC and it is still my daughters (22 years old) favorite place in the world.

We drive 13-14 hours to get there. The beaches in NC are beautiful and wide and close! Yet we choose to go to Michigan, to Palisades, to create memories and continue the family bonds that my mom and dad started years ago.

Please understand that weve lived with the power plant for many summers, as it was active during several of our summers there. However, being an active, highly regulated power plant that undergoes rigorous tests and standards is very different than what Holtec is trying to do now. Holtecs requested restart license present environmental risks and unknowns greater than an operating plant that seeks an extension of an existing license. For years, PNPs operator ran the plant knowing it was on a schedule to shut down permanently. PNPs operator deferred maintenance and investment based on this timeline. Simply stated, it operated the plant as a short-timer, not as if it would need to be on line through 2031, the expiration date of its then[1]existing license. The NRC granted waivers for safety upgrades that otherwise would have been required but for the imminent shut down. An additional risk here is the requested issuance of a new license to an entity that has never operated a nuclear power plant. If the EPA mandates a rigorous EIS when determining whether an operating plant with an experienced licensee and ongoing investment and NRC oversight should be allowed to continue operating beyond its license term, shouldnt the EPA - and the NRC and DOE - require at least an EIS when a plant that has been shut down and not subject to the same level of review as an operating plant seeks to restart? Holtecs request presents to the NRC and DOE an important and novel environmental impact question: can this plant, with its history of financial distress, aging infrastructure, deferred maintenance, and degradation from being out of operation, be restarted and operated safely without causing unacceptable risk to the immediate community, environment and the cherished resources of the Great Lakes? Answering this question requires the highest level of environmental review - an EIS that is directed to the unique circumstances of this plant and the unprecedented request before the NRC to restart a permanently shut down nuclear facility.

I ask you to thoughtfully consider and I thank you, we thank you, for doing so.

Sincerely,

Kathleen Dalhoff on behalf of the OBrien Family