ML070660285: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:Page 1 ot 1 Doris Mendiola -Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station From: "McCormack, Paul E." <Paul.E.McCormack@ibtco.com> " ' Yc-)To: <PilgrimEIS@nrc.gov> | {{#Wiki_filter:Page 1 ot 1 Doris Mendiola - Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station From: "McCormack, Paul E." <Paul.E.McCormack@ibtco.com> " ' Yc-) | ||
Date: 02/28/2007 3:06 PM | To: <PilgrimEIS@nrc.gov> | ||
Date: 02/28/2007 3:06 PM | |||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station My concern has to do with the spent fuel which is stored onsite.Although the Commission found that the site can safely accommodate the on site storage of the additional volume of spent fuel, it seems to have operated under the assumption that there will be a permanent repository developed in some remote part of the United States. Given that such a storage site needs to be in some remote, stable part of the United States, I do not understand how the Commission can think that the permanent storage of spent fuel in Plymouth, which is not as remote and is not as geographically as sites such as Yucca Mountain, Nevada.When the Plymouth Nuclear Plant was first approved, the working assumption was that only temporary storage of spent fuel would be required on site. Given that during the past 30+ years, no fuel has been shipped off-site, a prudent person would have to look at the storage as permanent. | Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station My concern has to do with the spent fuel which is stored onsite. | ||
As such, the Plymouth on site storage should be looked at as if permanent and the requirements should be as strict as those used in choosing a "permanent repository". | Although the Commission found that the site can safely accommodate the on site storage of the additional volume of spent fuel, it seems to have operated under the assumption that there will be a permanent repository developed in some remote part of the United States. Given that such a storage site needs to be in some remote, stable part of the United States, I do not understand how the Commission can think that the permanent storage of spent fuel in Plymouth, which is not as remote and is not as geographically as sites such as Yucca Mountain, Nevada. | ||
I do not think that the Plymouth site would qualify.At the least, the NRC should insist that the operator treat the spent fuel storage as permanent and provide the safest type of storage possible. | When the Plymouth Nuclear Plant was first approved, the working assumption was that only temporary storage of spent fuel would be required on site. Given that during the past 30+ years, no fuel has been shipped off-site, a prudent person would have to look at the storage as permanent. As such, the Plymouth on site storage should be looked at as if permanent and the requirements should be as strict as those used in choosing a "permanent repository". I do not think that the Plymouth site would qualify. | ||
At this time, I do not believe that pool storage is the "safest" means for a permanent storage.Regards, Paul McCormack Paul E. McCormack P.O. Box 2604 Duxbury, MA 02331-2604 (781) 934-9803 | At the least, the NRC should insist that the operator treat the spent fuel storage as permanent and provide the safest type of storage possible. At this time, I do not believe that pool storage is the "safest" means for a permanent storage. | ||
}00001 .HTM | Regards, Paul McCormack Paul E. McCormack C__I P.O. Box 2604 Duxbury, MA 02331-2604 ,-n-r-), | ||
: 6 :61187) | (781) 934-9803 | ||
--15 rn CJD 62e~& A file://C:\temp\GW }00001 .HTM 02/28/2007 | |||
C-ýtýml?\GWý0001 7.TMP a e fid Pa~e I c:\temp\GW}OOO1 7.TMP I | |||
,5.4 . , | |||
Mail Envelope Properties (45E5E0B8.F03 : 6 :61187) | |||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Creation Date 02/28/2007 3:05:59 PM From: "McCormack, Paul E." <Paul.E.McCormack@ibtco.com> | |||
Paul.E.McCormack@ibtco.com Recipients nrc.gov TWGWPO02.HQGWDOO1 PilgrimEIS Post Office TWGWPO02.HQGWDO01 | Created By: Paul.E.McCormack@ibtco.com Recipients nrc.gov TWGWPO02.HQGWDOO1 PilgrimEIS Post Office Route TWGWPO02.HQGWDO01 nrc.gov Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 1504 02/28/2007 3:05:59 PM TEXT.htm 6418 Mime.822 10361 Options Expiration Date: None Priority: Standard ReplyRequested: No Return Notification: None Concealed | ||
Return Notification: | |||
Concealed | |||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Security: | No Security: Standard}} | ||
Latest revision as of 08:46, 23 November 2019
| ML070660285 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 02/28/2007 |
| From: | Mccormack P - No Known Affiliation |
| To: | Rulemaking, Directives, and Editing Branch |
| References | |
| 71FR75280 00012 | |
| Download: ML070660285 (2) | |
Text
Page 1 ot 1 Doris Mendiola - Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station From: "McCormack, Paul E." <Paul.E.McCormack@ibtco.com> " ' Yc-)
To: <PilgrimEIS@nrc.gov>
Date: 02/28/2007 3:06 PM
Subject:
Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station My concern has to do with the spent fuel which is stored onsite.
Although the Commission found that the site can safely accommodate the on site storage of the additional volume of spent fuel, it seems to have operated under the assumption that there will be a permanent repository developed in some remote part of the United States. Given that such a storage site needs to be in some remote, stable part of the United States, I do not understand how the Commission can think that the permanent storage of spent fuel in Plymouth, which is not as remote and is not as geographically as sites such as Yucca Mountain, Nevada.
When the Plymouth Nuclear Plant was first approved, the working assumption was that only temporary storage of spent fuel would be required on site. Given that during the past 30+ years, no fuel has been shipped off-site, a prudent person would have to look at the storage as permanent. As such, the Plymouth on site storage should be looked at as if permanent and the requirements should be as strict as those used in choosing a "permanent repository". I do not think that the Plymouth site would qualify.
At the least, the NRC should insist that the operator treat the spent fuel storage as permanent and provide the safest type of storage possible. At this time, I do not believe that pool storage is the "safest" means for a permanent storage.
Regards, Paul McCormack Paul E. McCormack C__I P.O. Box 2604 Duxbury, MA 02331-2604 ,-n-r-),
(781) 934-9803
--15 rn CJD 62e~& A file://C:\temp\GW }00001 .HTM 02/28/2007
C-ýtýml?\GWý0001 7.TMP a e fid Pa~e I c:\temp\GW}OOO1 7.TMP I
,5.4 . ,
Mail Envelope Properties (45E5E0B8.F03 : 6 :61187)
Subject:
Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Creation Date 02/28/2007 3:05:59 PM From: "McCormack, Paul E." <Paul.E.McCormack@ibtco.com>
Created By: Paul.E.McCormack@ibtco.com Recipients nrc.gov TWGWPO02.HQGWDOO1 PilgrimEIS Post Office Route TWGWPO02.HQGWDO01 nrc.gov Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 1504 02/28/2007 3:05:59 PM TEXT.htm 6418 Mime.822 10361 Options Expiration Date: None Priority: Standard ReplyRequested: No Return Notification: None Concealed
Subject:
No Security: Standard