ML073100964: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 60: | Line 60: | ||
Rockland County); | Rockland County); | ||
(4) The potential health and envir onmental consequences of 20 additional years of dumping radionuclides into the Hudson River, combined with an analysis of the synergistic interaction of such radionuclides with other known Hudson River pollutants like PCBs, endocrine disruptors (including dioxins) and mercury; | |||
(5) The potential health and environmental conseque nces of 20 additional years of additional releases of radiat ion and other chemical toxins into the atmosphere, combined with an analysis of the synergistic interaction of such elements with other known pollu tants such as mercury; | (5) The potential health and environmental conseque nces of 20 additional years of additional releases of radiat ion and other chemical toxins into the atmosphere, combined with an analysis of the synergistic interaction of such elements with other known pollu tants such as mercury; | ||
| Line 74: | Line 74: | ||
(9) The long-term tax and economic e ffects of placing a term high level nuclear waste dump on t he banks of the Hudson River for an indefinite, and potentially centuries-long, duration. | (9) The long-term tax and economic e ffects of placing a term high level nuclear waste dump on t he banks of the Hudson River for an indefinite, and potentially centuries-long, duration. | ||
(10) The continued explosive population growth in the region (calculated using the same percentage of growth that has occurred over the past 20), which will exponentially increase the potential damage calculation for virtually every area of concern. | |||
In addition, I support consideration of the broad areas requested by members of the public and public interest gr oups during the September 19, 2007 public EIS meeting, including: | In addition, I support consideration of the broad areas requested by members of the public and public interest gr oups during the September 19, 2007 public EIS meeting, including: | ||
| Line 127: | Line 127: | ||
==Dear Chief,== | ==Dear Chief,== | ||
It is respectfully submitted that the special circumstances of Indian Point - i.e., its siting in a uniquely congested demographic area, 24 miles north of New York City , within 50 miles of over 20 million people, and its status as an identified and widely recognized terrorist target - warrants a particularly stringent and comprehensive analysis of all environmental factors, including: | It is respectfully submitted that the special circumstances of Indian Point - i.e., its siting in a uniquely congested demographic area, 24 miles north of New York City , within 50 miles of over 20 million people, and its status as an identified and widely recognized terrorist target - warrants a particularly stringent and comprehensive analysis of all environmental factors, including: | ||
(1) The environmental consequences of a terrorist attack that leads to a major and potentially rapid radiation release; (2) The prognosticated effects and conditions of global warming; (3) The potential health and environmental consequences of using the Hudson River as a source of public drinking water (as per the plan of Rockland County); | |||
(4) The potential health and environmental consequences of 20 additional years of dumping radionuclides into the Hudson River, combined with an analysis of the synergistic interaction of such radionuclides with other known Hudson River pollutants like PCBs, endocrine disruptors (including dioxins) and mercury; (5) The potential health and environmental consequences of 20 additional years of additional releases of radiation and other chemical toxins into the atmosphere, combined with an analysis of the synergistic interaction of such elements with other known pollutants such as mercury; (6) The potential health and environmental consequences of 20 additional years of additional releases of radiation and other chemical toxins released by Indian Point into the environment (especially toxic metals like cadmium) upon populations most susceptible to radiation and toxic chemicals, such as women, adolescents, children, babies, breast-fed infants and the embryo/fetus. | |||
(7) All reasonable energy alternatives, especially the renewable clean forms of energy that are widely viewed as the energy technologies of the "future" as well as efficiency technologies and demand-side options; (8) Environmental justice, especially the environmental and health impacts on poor communities and communities of color in the event of a large radiation release incident (e.g., the continued impact on those communities in New Orleans, long after Katrina) as well as the environmental impacts of 20 additio nal years of uranium mining and nuclear fuel processing and disposition upon Native American populations, people of color, and poor communities; (9) The long-term tax and economic effects of placing a term high level nuclear waste dump on the banks of the Hudson River for an indefinite, and pot entially centuries-long, duration. | |||
Pa ge 1of 2 11/6/2007file://C:\EMailCa pture\IndianPointLRSco p in g\308\attch1.htm (10) The continued explosive population growth in the region (calculated using the same percentage of growth that has occurred over the past 20), which will exponentially increase the potential damage calculation for virtually every area of concern. | Pa ge 1of 2 11/6/2007file://C:\EMailCa pture\IndianPointLRSco p in g\308\attch1.htm (10) The continued explosive population growth in the region (calculated using the same percentage of growth that has occurred over the past 20), which will exponentially increase the potential damage calculation for virtually every area of concern. | ||
In addition, I support consideration of the broad areas requested by members of the public and public interest groups during the September 19, 2007 public EIS meeting, including: | In addition, I support consideration of the broad areas requested by members of the public and public interest groups during the September 19, 2007 public EIS meeting, including: | ||
Revision as of 18:53, 12 July 2019
| ML073100964 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 10/16/2007 |
| From: | Public Commenter Public Commenter |
| To: | Division of License Renewal |
| References | |
| 72FR45075 | |
| Download: ML073100964 (7) | |
Text
From: "michel" <ciecplee@verizon.net>
To: <IndianPointEIS@nrc.gov> Date: 10/16/2007 12:16:06 PM
Subject:
reSubmission of Comments on the Scope of the Environmental Review of Indian Point (Michel Lee- CIECP)
Dear Chief,
Kindly exchange this submission fo r the one originally transmitted on October 12th. This version has corrected paragraph numbering and contact information.
Thank you.
________________________
__________________
______________________
____________
___
Subject:
Submission of Comments on the Scope of the Environmental Review of Indian Point (Michel Lee - CIECP)
October 11, 2007
Chief, Rules and Directives Branch
Division of Administrative Services
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Washington, DC 20555
Dear Chief,
It is respectfully submitted that the special circumstances of Indian Point - i.e., its siting in a uniquely congested demographic area, 24 miles north of New York City , within 50 miles of over 20 million peopl e, and its status as an identified and widely recogniz ed terrorist target - warrants a particularly stringent and comprehensiv e analysis of all environmental factors, including:
(1) The environmental consequences of a terrorist attack that leads to a major and potentially rapid radiation release;
(2) The prognosticated effects and conditions of global warming;
(3) The potential health and environmental consequences of using the Hudson River as a source of public drinking water (as per the plan of
Rockland County);
(4) The potential health and envir onmental consequences of 20 additional years of dumping radionuclides into the Hudson River, combined with an analysis of the synergistic interaction of such radionuclides with other known Hudson River pollutants like PCBs, endocrine disruptors (including dioxins) and mercury;
(5) The potential health and environmental conseque nces of 20 additional years of additional releases of radiat ion and other chemical toxins into the atmosphere, combined with an analysis of the synergistic interaction of such elements with other known pollu tants such as mercury;
(6) The potential health and environmental conseque nces of 20 additional years of additional releases of radiat ion and other chemical toxins released by Indian Point into the environment (especially toxic metals like cadmium)
upon populations most susceptible to radi ation and toxic chemicals, such as women, adolescents, children, b abies, breast-fed infants and the embryo/fetus.
(7) All reasonable energy alternatives, especially the renewable clean forms of energy that are widely view ed as the energy technologies of the "future" as well as efficiency technologies and demand-side options;
(8) Environmental justice, es pecially the environmental and health impacts on poor communities and communities of color in the event of a large radiation release incident (e.g., the continued im pact on those communities in New Orleans, long after Katrina) as well as the environmental impacts of 20 additional years of uranium mini ng and nuclear fuel processing and disposition upon Native American populat ions, people of color, and poor communities;
(9) The long-term tax and economic e ffects of placing a term high level nuclear waste dump on t he banks of the Hudson River for an indefinite, and potentially centuries-long, duration.
(10) The continued explosive population growth in the region (calculated using the same percentage of growth that has occurred over the past 20), which will exponentially increase the potential damage calculation for virtually every area of concern.
In addition, I support consideration of the broad areas requested by members of the public and public interest gr oups during the September 19, 2007 public EIS meeting, including:
- Wildlife and Fish
- Water and Air Resources
- Historic or Cultural Resources
- Taxes, Community Development
- Land Use
- Human Health
Sincerely,
Michel Lee, Esq.
Chairman
Council on Intelligent Energy
& Conservation Policy
265 Madison Rd
Scarsdale, New York 10583
(914) 420-5624
ciecplee@verizon.net
Federal Register Notice: 72FR45075 Comment Number: 308 Mail Envelope Properties (47309666.HQGWDO01.OWGWPO04.200.2000000.1.145062.1)
Subject:
reSubmission of Comments on the Scope of the Environmental Review of Indian Point (Michel Lee- CIECP)
Creation Date: 10/16/2007 12:16:06 PM From: "michel" <ciecplee@verizon.net>
Created By: ciecplee@verizon.net Recipients <IndianPointEIS@nrc.gov>
Post Office Route OWGWPO04.HQGWDO01 nrc.gov Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 4149 10/16/2007 12:16:06 PM TEXT.htm 19139 11/6/2007 4:29:26 PM Mime.822 26325 11/6/2007 4:29:26 PM Options Priority: Standard Reply Requested: No Return Notification: None None Concealed
Subject:
No Security: Standard
Dear Chief,
Kindly exchange this submission for the one originally transmitted on October 12 th. This version has corrected paragraph numbering and contact information.
Thank you.
______________________________________________________________________________
_
Subject:
Submission of Comments on the Scope of the Environmental Review of Indian Point (Michel Lee - CIECP)
October 11, 2007 Chief, Rules and Directives Branch Division of Administrative Services U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
Dear Chief,
It is respectfully submitted that the special circumstances of Indian Point - i.e., its siting in a uniquely congested demographic area, 24 miles north of New York City , within 50 miles of over 20 million people, and its status as an identified and widely recognized terrorist target - warrants a particularly stringent and comprehensive analysis of all environmental factors, including:
(1) The environmental consequences of a terrorist attack that leads to a major and potentially rapid radiation release; (2) The prognosticated effects and conditions of global warming; (3) The potential health and environmental consequences of using the Hudson River as a source of public drinking water (as per the plan of Rockland County);
(4) The potential health and environmental consequences of 20 additional years of dumping radionuclides into the Hudson River, combined with an analysis of the synergistic interaction of such radionuclides with other known Hudson River pollutants like PCBs, endocrine disruptors (including dioxins) and mercury; (5) The potential health and environmental consequences of 20 additional years of additional releases of radiation and other chemical toxins into the atmosphere, combined with an analysis of the synergistic interaction of such elements with other known pollutants such as mercury; (6) The potential health and environmental consequences of 20 additional years of additional releases of radiation and other chemical toxins released by Indian Point into the environment (especially toxic metals like cadmium) upon populations most susceptible to radiation and toxic chemicals, such as women, adolescents, children, babies, breast-fed infants and the embryo/fetus.
(7) All reasonable energy alternatives, especially the renewable clean forms of energy that are widely viewed as the energy technologies of the "future" as well as efficiency technologies and demand-side options; (8) Environmental justice, especially the environmental and health impacts on poor communities and communities of color in the event of a large radiation release incident (e.g., the continued impact on those communities in New Orleans, long after Katrina) as well as the environmental impacts of 20 additio nal years of uranium mining and nuclear fuel processing and disposition upon Native American populations, people of color, and poor communities; (9) The long-term tax and economic effects of placing a term high level nuclear waste dump on the banks of the Hudson River for an indefinite, and pot entially centuries-long, duration.
Pa ge 1of 2 11/6/2007file://C:\EMailCa pture\IndianPointLRSco p in g\308\attch1.htm (10) The continued explosive population growth in the region (calculated using the same percentage of growth that has occurred over the past 20), which will exponentially increase the potential damage calculation for virtually every area of concern.
In addition, I support consideration of the broad areas requested by members of the public and public interest groups during the September 19, 2007 public EIS meeting, including:
Wildlife and Fish Water and Air Resources Historic or Cultural Resources Taxes, Community Development Environmental Justice Land Use Human Health Sincerely, Michel Lee, Esq.
Chairman Council on Intelligent Energy
& Conservation Policy 265 Madison Rd Scarsdale, New York 10583 (914) 420-5624 ciecplee@verizon.net Pa ge 2of 2 11/6/2007file://C:\EMailCa pture\IndianPointLRSco p in g\308\attch1.htm