|
|
Line 16: |
Line 16: |
|
| |
|
| =Text= | | =Text= |
| {{#Wiki_filter:J7OlI q; V I1; ~ * -u~ mlu v | | {{#Wiki_filter:J7OlI q; V I1; ~ * - u~ mlu v *m ** l'*~ y J .IIIIIIOOIVJI Il~A** |
| * m y J .IIIIIIOOIVJI I l~A** mll | | i* mll |
| * la v From: "Dotty Reynolds" <ddreynolds@all2ez.net> | | * la v From: "Dotty Reynolds" <ddreynolds@all2ez.net> |
| To: <OysterCreekEIS | | To: <OysterCreekEIS @nrc.gov> |
| @ nrc.gov>Date: Wed, Jul 5, 2006 4:57 PM | | Date: Wed, Jul 5, 2006 4:57 PM |
|
| |
|
| ==Subject:== | | ==Subject:== |
| U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission Hearing COMMENTS FOR OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT PUBLIC HEARINGS, JULY 12,2006 No one expected a tsunami wave to sweep across Indonesia, leaving a swath of death and destruction. | | U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission Hearing COMMENTS FOR OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT PUBLIC HEARINGS, JULY 12,2006 No one expected a tsunami wave to sweep across Indonesia, leaving a swath of death and destruction. No one thought a category 5 hurricane would strike the Gulf coast, causing levees to collapse in New Orleans. No one believed terrorists could fly into the world trade center, collapsing the twin towers and killing almost 3,000 people. No one expects a nuclear accident of catastrophic proportions at Oyster Creek, but should we trust the oldest nuclear plant in the U.S. to operate safely for another 20 years? |
| No one thought a category 5 hurricane would strike the Gulf coast, causing levees to collapse in New Orleans. No one believed terrorists could fly into the world trade center, collapsing the twin towers and killing almost 3,000 people. No one expects a nuclear accident of catastrophic proportions at Oyster Creek, but should we trust the oldest nuclear plant in the U.S. to operate safely for another 20 years?It is imperative that all safety factors and concerns be examined.How can the NRC be allowed to ignore issues which the State of New Jersey considers important? | | It is imperative that all safety factors and concerns be examined. |
| The steel drywell liner, the barrier preventing the release of radiation during a reactor accident, needs close scrutiny. | | How can the NRC be allowed to ignore issues which the State of New Jersey considers important? The steel drywell liner, the barrier preventing the release of radiation during a reactor accident, needs close scrutiny. Why are tests not being done now to measure the thickness of the drywell liner, despite previous evidence of corrosion? Should we risk a terrorist attack at the site of a nuclear plant with on-site storage of spent nuclear fuel? In the event of an accident, the evacuation route is unworkable for much of the area, including all of Long Beach Island. |
| Why are tests not being done now to measure the thickness of the drywell liner, despite previous evidence of corrosion? | | We do know that millions of small fish, shrimp and other aquatic animals are currently being killed due to the fact that the plant has no water cooling towers. Cooling towers are a necessity to prevent these losses of marine life which are trapped against water intake screens, or drawn into the plant, or killed by the change in water temperature in the bay. Restoring wetlands is not a reasonable alternative. |
| Should we risk a terrorist attack at the site of a nuclear plant with on-site storage of spent nuclear fuel? In the event of an accident, the evacuation route is unworkable for much of the area, including all of Long Beach Island.We do know that millions of small fish, shrimp and other aquatic animals are currently being killed due to the fact that the plant has no water cooling towers. Cooling towers are a necessity to prevent these losses of marine life which are trapped against water intake screens, or drawn into the plant, or killed by the change in water temperature in the bay. Restoring wetlands is not a reasonable alternative. | | The NRC may do doing an extensive in depth review, but unless all concerns are considered objectively, the results will be flawed. If the nuclear plant is deemed necessary for power, then a new plant as planned in the 70's, should replace the current obsolete plant with one in the new safer design. |
| The NRC may do doing an extensive in depth review, but unless all concerns are considered objectively, the results will be flawed. If the nuclear plant is deemed necessary for power, then a new plant as planned in the 70's, should replace the current obsolete plant with one in the new safer design.In spite of the best maintenance and replacement of parts, the older our car, the greater the likelihood our car will break down. If we want to ensure that we will get to work every day, safely, we routinely replace our car with a new one. How long would we continue to drive a car, or should we operate a nuclear plant, which could break down with dire consequences? | | In spite of the best maintenance and replacement of parts, the older our car, the greater the likelihood our car will break down. If we want to ensure that we will get to work every day, safely, we routinely replace our car with a new one. How long would we continue to drive a car, or should we operate a nuclear plant, which could break down with dire consequences? |
| The decision regarding license renewal could mean life or death for thousands; the potential health, safety and economic impacts on New Jersey are enormous. | | The decision regarding license renewal could mean life or death for thousands; the potential health, safety and economic impacts on New Jersey are enormous. Congressman Jim Saxton, in support of requests by many elected officials and citizen groups, has introduced H.R. |
| Congressman Jim Saxton, in support of requests by many elected officials and citizen groups, has introduced H.R.966, a bill that would require an independent assessment of safety and security issues by the National Academy of Sciences Research Council. It is imperative that the Academy of Sciences determine that Oyster Creek nuclear plant is safe, secure and necessary, prior | | 966, a bill that would require an independent assessment of safety and security issues by the National Academy of Sciences Research Council. It is imperative that the Academy of Sciences determine that Oyster Creek nuclear plant is safe, secure and necessary, prior |
| -'401 IU%11001 I 10vul"'We Y %Oyi I II I Iloolul I r1tval it IV Page 2 to NRC relicensing approval, or Oyster Creek must be shut down.$4.95/mo. | | |
| National Dialup, Anti-Spam, Anti-Virus, 5mb personal web space. 5x faster dialup for only$9.95/mo. | | -'401 IU%11001 I 10vul"'We Y %OyiIIIIIloolul I r1tval itIV Page 2 to NRC relicensing approval, or Oyster Creek must be shut down. |
| No contracts, No fees, No Kidding! See http://www.AI12Easy.net for more details! | | $4.95/mo. National Dialup, Anti-Spam, Anti-Virus, 5mb personal web space. 5x faster dialup for only |
| Mail Envelope Properties (44AC27BA.47B | | $9.95/mo. No contracts, No fees, No Kidding! See http://www.AI12Easy.net for more details! |
| : 12: 13435)Page 1 | | |
| | Page 1 Mail Envelope Properties (44AC27BA.47B : 12: 13435) |
|
| |
|
| ==Subject:== | | ==Subject:== |
| Creation Date From: Created By: U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission Hearing Wed, Jul 5, 2006 4:57 PM"Dotty Reynolds" <ddreynolds
| | U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission Hearing Creation Date Wed, Jul 5, 2006 4:57 PM From: "Dotty Reynolds" <ddreynolds @all2ez.net> |
| @all2ez.net> | | Created By: ddreynolds@ alI2ez.net Recipients nrc.gov TWGWPO01 .HQGWDO0I OysterCreekEIS Post Office Route TWGWPO01.HQGWDO01 nrc.gov Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 3115 Wednesday, July 5, 2006 4:57 PM Mime.822 4261 Options Expiration Date: None t Priority: High ReplyRequested: No Return Notification: None Concealed |
| ddreynolds@ | |
| alI2ez.net Recipients nrc.gov TWGWPO01 .HQGWDO0I OysterCreekEIS Post Office TWGWPO01.HQGWDO01 Route nrc.gov Files MESSAGE Mime.822 Options Expiration Date: t Priority: ReplyRequested: | |
| Return Notification: | |
| Concealed | |
|
| |
|
| ==Subject:== | | ==Subject:== |
| Security: Size 3115 4261 Date & Time Wednesday, July 5, 2006 4:57 PM None High No None No Standard Junk Mail Handling Evaluation Results Message is eligible for Junk Mail handling This message was not classified as Junk Mail Junk Mail settings when this message was delivered Junk Mail handling disabled by User Junk Mail handling disabled by Administrator Junk List is not enabled Junk Mail using personal address books is not enabled Block List is not enabled}} | | No Security: Standard Junk Mail Handling Evaluation Results Message is eligible for Junk Mail handling This message was not classified as Junk Mail Junk Mail settings when this message was delivered Junk Mail handling disabled by User Junk Mail handling disabled by Administrator Junk List is not enabled Junk Mail using personal address books is not enabled Block List is not enabled}} |
Letter Sequence Request |
---|
|
Initiation
- Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request
- Acceptance, Acceptance
Results
Other: ML052280187, ML060410476, ML060410481, ML060720127, ML060720129, ML060720130, ML061500190, ML061500192, ML061580022, ML062160029, ML062550158, ML062890168, ML062930088, ML070100418, ML070110360, ML070110371, ML071620386
|
MONTHYEARML0607201271992-08-31031 August 1992 Update of Alternate Cooling Water System Study for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Volume 1 Technical and Economic Evaluation Project stage: Other ML0607201291992-08-31031 August 1992 Update of Alternate Cooling Water System Study for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Volume 2 Environmental Effects and Cost Analyses Project stage: Other ML0522801872005-10-12012 October 2005 Enclosure 1: Figure 2-2 6-Mile Vicinity Map, Enclosure 2: Figure 2-3 Oyster Creek Generating Station Site Boundary Project stage: Other ML0534003822005-11-0101 November 2005 Environmental Scoping Meeting Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and National Environmental Policy Act, November 1, 2005 Project stage: Meeting ML0534003712005-11-0101 November 2005 Official Transcript of Proceedings, NRC: Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Plant Public Meeting: Evening Session, Toms River, Nj, Tuesday, November 1, 2005 Project stage: Meeting ML0534003612005-11-0101 November 2005 Official Transcript of Proceedings - NRC, Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Plant Public Meeting: Afternoon Session, Toms River, Nj, Tuesday, November 1, 2005 Project stage: Meeting ML0531303872005-11-0909 November 2005 Request for Additional Information (RAI) Regarding Severe Accident Mitigation Alternatives (SAMA) for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Project stage: RAI ML0535401002005-12-19019 December 2005 - Summary of Conference Call with Amergen Energy Company, LLC (Amergen) to Discuss the Severe Accident Mitigation Alternative (SAMA) Requests for Additional Information (Rais) for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Project stage: RAI ML0601302382006-01-0909 January 2006 Oyster Creek, Response to NRC Request for Additional Information Related to Severe Accident Management Alternatives (SAMA) Project stage: Response to RAI ML0604104762006-01-18018 January 2006 Letter to the Honorable Jon Corzine from New Jersey Dept of Environment Protection, Recommendation Against Further State Funding of the Radiation and Public Health Project Report on Strontium 90 and Oyster Creek Ngs Project stage: Other ML0604104812006-01-31031 January 2006 New Jersey Dept of Environmental Protection'S Review of the Radiation and Public Health Project'S Report on Strontium 90 and Baby Teeth of New Jersey Children with Cancer, as Relates to the Oyster Creek Ngs Project stage: Other ML0607201302006-03-0202 March 2006 Determination of Cooling Tower Availability for Oyster Creek Generating Station, Final Report Project stage: Other ML0606704802006-03-0505 March 2006 2006/03/05- Telecommunication with Amergen Energy Company, LLC, to Discuss Requests for Additional Information Pertaining to NRC Staff'S Review of the Severe Accident Mitigation Alternative (SAMA) Analysis in the Oyster Creek License Renewa Project stage: RAI ML0607201262006-03-0808 March 2006 2006/03/08-Response to NRC Request for Additional Information Regarding the Environmental License Renewal Review for the Oyster Creek Generating Station Project stage: Response to RAI ML0607603792006-03-15015 March 2006 Oyster Creek - Clarifications to Responses to NRC Request for Additional Information Related to Severe Accident Management Alternatives Project stage: Response to RAI ML0615001922006-06-0909 June 2006 2006/06/09-Request Initiation of an Essential Fish Habitat Consultation Regarding License Renewal of Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Project stage: Other ML0615602302006-06-0909 June 2006 Letter to C.N. Swenson: Notice of Availability of Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Project stage: Draft Other ML0615001902006-06-0909 June 2006 2006/06/09-Request Initiation of a Section 7 Consultation Regarding License Renewal of Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Project stage: Other ML0621600292006-06-13013 June 2006 Letter from Ms. Dorothy Guzzo, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer, Regarding Oyster Creek Ngs License Renewal Project stage: Other ML0615800222006-06-13013 June 2006 2006/06/13-Oyster Creek License Renewal Application Review (TAC No. MC7625) (HPO-J2004-7021) Project stage: Other ML0620604362006-07-0505 July 2006 Email from Dotty Reynolds Regarding Environmental Review of Oyster Creek Project stage: Request ML0622301292006-07-12012 July 2006 Powerpoint Presentation Associated with Oyster Creek Draft EIS Public Meetings ML0622205262006-07-12012 July 2006 Transcript of Oyster Creek Dseis Meeting 07/12/2006, (Evening Session) Pp. 1-118 Project stage: Meeting ML0622204582006-07-12012 July 2006 Transcript of Oyster Creek Dseis Meeting 07/12/2006, (Afternoon Session) Pp. 1-105 Project stage: Meeting ML0620604432006-07-13013 July 2006 Email from Pat Crocker Regarding Environmental Review of Oyster Creek Ngs Project stage: Request ML0624800412006-08-0909 August 2006 2006/08/09-Comment (2) of Jim Saxton Opposing Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Issued as Part of the Operating License Renewal Process for the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Facility in Forked River, New Jersey Project stage: Request ML0622301392006-08-10010 August 2006 2006/08/10-Summary of Public Meetings on the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Regarding Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station License License Renewal Review ML0625501662006-08-30030 August 2006 Comment (6) of Edith Gbur, Re Questions Regarding EIS Project stage: Request ML0625501582006-08-30030 August 2006 2006/08/30-Comment (3) of Michael J. Kennish on Generic Environmental Impact Statement (Geis) Regarding License Renewal of Oyster Creek Project stage: Other ML0625501682006-09-0101 September 2006 Comment (7) of David J. Mckeon, Re Oyster Creek EIS - Question on Strontium-90 Emission Project stage: Request ML0626102342006-09-0707 September 2006 Comment (9) of Robert Scro on Behalf of Barnegat Bay National Estuary Program Opposing the Generic Environmental Impact Station for Oyster Creek, Project stage: Request ML0626104162006-09-0808 September 2006 Comment (10) of Raechelle Edwards on Behalf of Julia Lemense Huff Re Renewal of Oyster Creek License Project stage: Request ML0626102452006-09-12012 September 2006 Comment (19) of Edith Gbur Re Oyster Creek EIS Project stage: Request ML0628901682006-09-28028 September 2006 2006/09/28-NOAA - F. Gillespie - Essential Fish Habitat Consultation Regarding License Renewal of Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Project stage: Other ML0629300882006-10-18018 October 2006 2006/10/18-Letter Received on October 16, 2006, Regarding the Essential Fish Habitat for License Renewal of Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (TAC #MC7625) Project stage: Other ML0701004182006-11-14014 November 2006 E-MAIL: (PA) Extension for Efh Consult Oyster Creek TAC MC7625 Project stage: Other ML0633203462006-11-21021 November 2006 NOAA Biological Opinion for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Project stage: Request ML0633803662006-12-0404 December 2006 Email from William Maher, Exelon Corp., Non-rad Wastes at Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Project stage: Request ML0701103602007-01-17017 January 2007 Notice of Availability of the Final Plant - Specific Supplement 28 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants (Geis) Regarding Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Project stage: Other ML0701103712007-01-17017 January 2007 Final Supplement 28 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal Nuclear Plants Regarding Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Project stage: Other ML0701002342007-01-31031 January 2007 NUREG-1437, Vol. 1, Supp. 28, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants Supplement 28 Regarding Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Final Report - Main Report. Project stage: Acceptance Review ML0701002582007-01-31031 January 2007 NUREG-1437, Vol. 2, Supp. 28, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants Regarding Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. Project stage: Acceptance Review ML0716203862007-05-24024 May 2007 E-Mail: (PA) the Consolidated Record for Consistency Appeals Under the Coastal Zone Management Act (Czma) Project stage: Other 2006-03-08
[Table View] |
|
---|
Category:E-Mail
MONTHYEARML22235A7862022-08-23023 August 2022 Acceptance Review: Exemption Request from 10 CFR 20, Appendix G, LLW Shipping Investigation Requirements ML21181A1882021-06-30030 June 2021 E-mail from S. Johnston, Holtec, to A. Snyder and F. Bower, NRC - Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station - Readiness Status for ISFSI Only Inspection ML21175A2092021-06-24024 June 2021 E-mail from A. Sterdis to P. Longmire - Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station: ISFSI-only Physical Security Plan (Stating Implementation Intent) ML21162A3602021-06-11011 June 2021 E-mail Response from the State of New Jersey Regarding the Pending Revision to the Emergency Plan to Reflect Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Only Status ML21162A1172021-06-11011 June 2021 E-mail to HDI: Acceptance Review - FOF Exemption ML21168A0172021-06-10010 June 2021 E-mail from HDI: RAI Response ML21161A2572021-06-0707 June 2021 State Consultation: ISFSI-only Physical Security Plan (Email Response) ML21175A0712021-06-0202 June 2021 Issuance of Request for Additional Information: Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. Request for Amendment to Technical Specifications ML21148A0562021-05-27027 May 2021 E-mail to State of New Jersey Informing of the Pending Revision to the Emergency Plan to Reflect Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Only Status ML21132A3182021-05-12012 May 2021 E-Mail from V. Gubbi, DEP to Z. Cruz, NRC - Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station - State of New Jersey Response to the Pending Revision to the Defueled Technical Specifications to Reflect Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Only ML21132A0312021-05-11011 May 2021 E-mail to State of New Jersey Informing of the Pending Revision to the Physical Security Plan to Reflect Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Only Status ML21119A1422021-04-28028 April 2021 E-mail to State of New Jersey Informing of the Pending Revision to the Emergency Plan to Reflect Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Only Status ML21113A0742021-04-23023 April 2021 Acceptance Review Email - April 20, 2021 Oyster Creek Request for Exemption from 10 CFR Part 73 Requirements Due to Covid ML21099A0382021-04-0808 April 2021 Email from Z. Cruz to A. Sterdis - Request for Additional Information - HDI Request for Approval of Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Facility Only Emergency Plan ML21085A4872021-03-26026 March 2021 E-mail from Z. Cruz to A. Sterdis - Acceptance Review: Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station - Request for Approval of Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Only Permanently Defueled Technical Specifications ML21064A2432021-03-0505 March 2021 Email from Z. Cruz to A. Sterdis Acceptance Review_ Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station - Request for Approval of Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Facility Only Emergency Plan and Emergency Action Level Scheme ML21064A2392021-03-0202 March 2021 E-mail from Z. Cruz to A. Sterdis Acceptance Review - Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station - Request for Approval of Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Only Physical Security Plan ML20345A1462020-12-0909 December 2020 E-mail - Response to Request for Additional Information: HDI Request for One-Time Exemption from Part 73, Appendix B FOF Requirements ML20335A3112020-11-30030 November 2020 Request for Additional Information Regarding Request for a one-time Exemption from Part 73, Appendix B Requirements for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station ML20332A1472020-11-24024 November 2020 Acceptance Review: November 20 2020 Exemption Request from 10 CFR Part 73 Appendix B Requirements for Oyster Creek ML20297A2372020-10-22022 October 2020 Request for Additional Information - HDI Fleet Decommissioning Quality Assurance Program ML20279A5082020-10-0505 October 2020 Email to Holtec - Response to Notification of Oyster Creek Onsite Property Insurance Coverage ML20266G4032020-09-22022 September 2020 Acceptance Review Email - Request for Approval of HDI Fleet Decommissioning Quality Assurance Program, Revision 0 ML20134H8742020-05-12012 May 2020 Request for Additional Information Regarding Request for Temporary Exemption from Part 73, Appendix B Requirements ML20133J9182020-05-11011 May 2020 Acceptance Review Email - Oyster Creek Request for Exemption from Part 73 Qualification Requirements ML20120A0252020-04-22022 April 2020 NRR E-mail Capture - (External_Sender) Oyster Creek Sea Turtle Handling and Conservation Recommendation Obligations NRC-2019-0073, Response from NEIMA Local Community Advisory Board Questionnaire 10-30-2019 R Discenza2019-10-30030 October 2019 Response from NEIMA Local Community Advisory Board Questionnaire 10-30-2019 R Discenza ML19344C8022019-10-20020 October 2019 Response from NEIMA Local Community Advisory Board Questionnaire 10-20-2019 a Dressler ML19344C8002019-10-0909 October 2019 Response from NEIMA Local Community Advisory Board Questionnaire 10-09-2019 W Mcmullin ML19344C7982019-10-0909 October 2019 Response from NEIMA Local Community Advisory Board Questionnaire 10-09-2019 M Noto ML19344C7992019-10-0909 October 2019 Response from NEIMA Local Community Advisory Board Questionnaire 10-09-2019 s Feldman ML19344C7932019-10-0909 October 2019 Response from NEIMA Local Community Advisory Board Questionnaire 10-09-2019 C Bischoff ML19344C7962019-10-0909 October 2019 Response from NEIMA Local Community Advisory Board Questionnaire 10-09-2019 G Adams ML19344C7912019-10-0808 October 2019 Response from NEIMA Local Community Advisory Board Questionnaire 10-08-2019 J Branciforte ML19344C7902019-10-0808 October 2019 Response from NEIMA Local Community Advisory Board Questionnaire 10-08-2019 Anonymous ML19344C7892019-10-0505 October 2019 Response from NEIMA Local Community Advisory Board Questionnaire 10-05-2019 P Dressler ML19263D1222019-09-20020 September 2019 for Your Action Request for Additional Information Hdi Oyster Creek PSDAR ML19214A0452019-08-0202 August 2019 NRC to NMFS, Revised Proposed Action for Oyster Creek Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation ML19182A3422019-07-0101 July 2019 Transaction ML19178A0702019-06-26026 June 2019 Email to State of New Jersey - Oyster Creek - Request Comments on Proposed Amendment to Remove Reference to the Oyster Creek Cyber Security Plan and Update License Condition 2.C.(4) in the Renewed Facility License ML19196A3422019-06-20020 June 2019 Email: Courtesy Notice on the Issuance of the Oyster Creek License Transfer and Exemption (Sierra Club) ML19196A3342019-06-20020 June 2019 Email: Courtesy Notice on the Issuance of the Oyster Creek License Transfer and Exemption ML19162A2242019-06-11011 June 2019 NRC to NMFS, NRC Responses to NMFS Requests for Additional Information for Oyster Creek ESA Section 7 Consultation NRC-2018-0237, Comment from Paul Dressler of the Concerned Citizens for Lacey Coalition, Regarding the Oyster Creek Nuclear Plant License Transfer Application2019-06-0707 June 2019 Comment from Paul Dressler of the Concerned Citizens for Lacey Coalition, Regarding the Oyster Creek Nuclear Plant License Transfer Application ML19155A1182019-06-0404 June 2019 Incoming E-mail from State of New Jersey on the Oyster Creek Exemption for Reduced Insurances and Use of Decommissioning Trust Fund for Spent Fuel Management and Site Restoration ML19155A1192019-06-0404 June 2019 State of New Jersey Comments - Oyster Creek Conforming Amendment Associated with the Oyster Creek Generating Station License Transfer Application ML19154A0582019-05-31031 May 2019 E-mail Response from State of New Jersey Dated May 31, 2019, Notification-and-Request-Oyster Creek License Transfer Application L-2018-LLM-0002 ML19158A2912019-05-30030 May 2019 NRR E-mail Capture - Oyster Creek ESA Consultation: Information Requests from NMFS ML19158A2772019-05-28028 May 2019 NRR E-mail Capture - Oyster Creek ESA Consultation: Information Requests from NMFS ML19148A4392019-05-24024 May 2019 NMFS to NRC, Requests for Additional Information to Support Oyster Creek Reinitiated Section 7 Consultation 2022-08-23
[Table view] |
Text
J7OlI q; V I1; ~ * - u~ mlu v *m ** l'*~ y J .IIIIIIOOIVJI Il~A**
i* mll
- la v From: "Dotty Reynolds" <ddreynolds@all2ez.net>
To: <OysterCreekEIS @nrc.gov>
Date: Wed, Jul 5, 2006 4:57 PM
Subject:
U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission Hearing COMMENTS FOR OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT PUBLIC HEARINGS, JULY 12,2006 No one expected a tsunami wave to sweep across Indonesia, leaving a swath of death and destruction. No one thought a category 5 hurricane would strike the Gulf coast, causing levees to collapse in New Orleans. No one believed terrorists could fly into the world trade center, collapsing the twin towers and killing almost 3,000 people. No one expects a nuclear accident of catastrophic proportions at Oyster Creek, but should we trust the oldest nuclear plant in the U.S. to operate safely for another 20 years?
It is imperative that all safety factors and concerns be examined.
How can the NRC be allowed to ignore issues which the State of New Jersey considers important? The steel drywell liner, the barrier preventing the release of radiation during a reactor accident, needs close scrutiny. Why are tests not being done now to measure the thickness of the drywell liner, despite previous evidence of corrosion? Should we risk a terrorist attack at the site of a nuclear plant with on-site storage of spent nuclear fuel? In the event of an accident, the evacuation route is unworkable for much of the area, including all of Long Beach Island.
We do know that millions of small fish, shrimp and other aquatic animals are currently being killed due to the fact that the plant has no water cooling towers. Cooling towers are a necessity to prevent these losses of marine life which are trapped against water intake screens, or drawn into the plant, or killed by the change in water temperature in the bay. Restoring wetlands is not a reasonable alternative.
The NRC may do doing an extensive in depth review, but unless all concerns are considered objectively, the results will be flawed. If the nuclear plant is deemed necessary for power, then a new plant as planned in the 70's, should replace the current obsolete plant with one in the new safer design.
In spite of the best maintenance and replacement of parts, the older our car, the greater the likelihood our car will break down. If we want to ensure that we will get to work every day, safely, we routinely replace our car with a new one. How long would we continue to drive a car, or should we operate a nuclear plant, which could break down with dire consequences?
The decision regarding license renewal could mean life or death for thousands; the potential health, safety and economic impacts on New Jersey are enormous. Congressman Jim Saxton, in support of requests by many elected officials and citizen groups, has introduced H.R.
966, a bill that would require an independent assessment of safety and security issues by the National Academy of Sciences Research Council. It is imperative that the Academy of Sciences determine that Oyster Creek nuclear plant is safe, secure and necessary, prior
-'401 IU%11001 I 10vul"'We Y %OyiIIIIIloolul I r1tval itIV Page 2 to NRC relicensing approval, or Oyster Creek must be shut down.
$4.95/mo. National Dialup, Anti-Spam, Anti-Virus, 5mb personal web space. 5x faster dialup for only
$9.95/mo. No contracts, No fees, No Kidding! See http://www.AI12Easy.net for more details!
Page 1 Mail Envelope Properties (44AC27BA.47B : 12: 13435)
Subject:
U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission Hearing Creation Date Wed, Jul 5, 2006 4:57 PM From: "Dotty Reynolds" <ddreynolds @all2ez.net>
Created By: ddreynolds@ alI2ez.net Recipients nrc.gov TWGWPO01 .HQGWDO0I OysterCreekEIS Post Office Route TWGWPO01.HQGWDO01 nrc.gov Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 3115 Wednesday, July 5, 2006 4:57 PM Mime.822 4261 Options Expiration Date: None t Priority: High ReplyRequested: No Return Notification: None Concealed
Subject:
No Security: Standard Junk Mail Handling Evaluation Results Message is eligible for Junk Mail handling This message was not classified as Junk Mail Junk Mail settings when this message was delivered Junk Mail handling disabled by User Junk Mail handling disabled by Administrator Junk List is not enabled Junk Mail using personal address books is not enabled Block List is not enabled