ML25153A009
| ML25153A009 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 05/30/2025 |
| From: | Public Commenter Public Commenter |
| To: | NRC/NMSS/DREFS |
| NRC/NMSS/DREFS | |
| References | |
| 90FR16008 | |
| Download: ML25153A009 (3) | |
Text
From:
Alfred Meyer <alfred.c.meyer@gmail.com>
Sent:
Friday, May 30, 2025 3:03 PM To:
Subject:
[External_Sender] Point Beach Draft SEIS Climate Change Questions Follow Up Flag:
Follow up Flag Status:
Flagged
Dear Kevin,
Thank you for volunteering to guide me through understanding how the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission addresses the accident risks presented by climate change when deciding to extend the operating license at the two Point Beach Reactors.
This email will state why I firmly believe that it is essential to consider how the changing weather patterns are likely to threaten the operational safety of Point Beach through 2053, and to ensure that the site is or soon will be adequately protected against such threats, before license extension is granted. I will present a hypothetical situation which illustrates the sort of investigations and considerations needed in order to determine that the environmental impact of a catastrophic accident will be acceptably low.
When this site was first evaluated in the 1960s, the concept of changing weather patterns with greater volatility and greater extremes was not considered. As we experience dramatically changing weather events, they must be fully considered as accident risks, and steps taken to mitigate these risks. Site safety must be fully reassessed in light of current and projected weather events. While historical weather data provides useful understanding of past patterns, it is imperative that thorough and complete consideration be made of the expected and potential future weather events that will take place during the period of time for this license extension.
For example, variations in the water level in Lake Michigan must be fully considered, noting that a record low level occurred in 2013, and just seven years later in 2020, a record high level occurred. What conditions can be expected in the years from 2030 to 2053? Site stability must be assessed assuming potentially greater extremes over a number of years. Also operational safety considerations relative to water supply and water temperature for safe reactor operation and cooling of irradiated spent nuclear fuel need to be addressed.
Another concern is that the site must be evaluated for risk of flooding and erosion during extreme precipitation events. As the atmospheric conditions change to carry more moisture, with atmospheric rivers forming and large storms sometimes stalling over areas, are the measures for onsite water management sufficient to handle extreme events to avoid flooding and site erosion?
Derecho storms with strong horizontal winds and waves are also of concern. Duane Arnold in Iowa was damaged by such a storm several years ago. Were these types of storms considered in the 1960s and 1970s evaluation of site stability and safety?
Using just these three aspects of climate change as an example, how does the NRC evaluate and assess the following two scenarios among many?
Lets assume an extreme rainfall event at Point Beach of 9 inches, (an assumption which is midway between the 1990 Green Bay one day rainfall record of 4.9 inches, and the 1946 Mellen rainfall of 11.7 inches). Such an event would likely saturate the ground at Point Beach, cause flooding and/or erosion of the site. Are these effects fully considered and addressed?
Then consider that immediately following this extreme rain event, a derecho hits the site. How do the high winds and big waves impact the rain saturated site? Has the shoreline been designed to withstand a combination of these two back to back events if the level of Lake Michigan is either at a record high or at a record low?
I would greatly appreciate learning how the NRC takes into account this one hypothetical scenario to ensure that the site is safe from a climate induced accident. Can you please also inform me of what other scenarios have been considered before extending the operating license?
Thank you very much,
Alfred Meyer, Board Member Physicians for Social Responsibility - Wisconsin alfred.c.meyer@gmail.com
Federal Register Notice:
90FR16008 Comment Number:
12 Mail Envelope Properties (CA+hB0BCO6EJfccb0f6k9OHSKMsyakBU+tivCc2r=SdWGLuPRFQ)
Subject:
[External_Sender] Point Beach Draft SEIS Climate Change Questions Sent Date:
5/30/2025 3:03:21 PM Received Date:
5/30/2025 3:03:44 PM From:
Alfred Meyer Created By:
alfred.c.meyer@gmail.com Recipients:
"Kevin Folk" <Kevin.Folk@nrc.gov>
Tracking Status: None Post Office:
mail.gmail.com Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 3994 5/30/2025 3:03:44 PM Options Priority:
Normal Return Notification:
No Reply Requested:
Yes Sensitivity:
Normal Expiration Date: