ML063340359
| ML063340359 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle, 05200011  |
| Issue date: | 11/20/2006 |
| From: | Lanier J - No Known Affiliation |
| To: | NRC/ADM/DAS/RDB |
| References | |
| +findbmpk, +reviewedcja, 71FR56187 00001 | |
| Download: ML063340359 (2) | |
Text
RULEF CIS 618 McLaws Street Saauaý Sava 2 GA 31405 2S noember 20, 2006 Chief, Rules and Directive Branch Division of Administrative Services Mail Stop T-6D59 R :
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Re: Comments on Southern Nuclear Operating Company's Application for an Early Site Permit at Plant Vogtle, filed August 15, 2006-Docket # 52-11 Sir:
I am opposed to Southern Nuclear Operating Company's plan to add two new reactors at Plant Vogtle. No matter Which of the new reactor designs are chosen, the reactors will still have emissions that will be released into the air and water. The water emissions will eventually make their way down the Savannah River and affect the Savannah area.
Fishing has long been popular here and as a society we encourage our children to get hooked on fishing instead of drugs. They will not want to get involved with fishing knowing that their catch will be contaminated with more nuclear reactor byproducts.
What about those who live along the Savannah River who get their main food supply
.fr6iijhfish? ý,B,y approving the plan for new reactors you are basically telling them "Tough lk, we'don't care, move somewhere else! '. "' "
.7f) M
As you may know, many'parts nave and cgoa &'0fiiiuetrbe teen hid hardby' drought. The state has imposed the first stage of statewide watering restrictions and they re stiIl in efict even 3.lcq though the
-1211jTC~ r'~
r, I3 drought has been alleviated somewhat. Since we are tcnlcalltll In a Watier th' 4fos'sil f'iel-bummgii *oWerplant pi ing more nuclear ist e'*last-thi'n-g rt6 tnafconsujei w!e' shouild*I.1be do6inhg, even ore, it wl-lwI
- .lO~ ~ *'j ~ C ~ *** ~~fV [ *ý,'-c,; ( .1,;,{'
-,1r,\ t .. .
- 1 i !**, ; I,' , 7i;]" - , ,ý ; "-, l~ . , 'I'(1.j i ',1 ,:,,}]*i. """
only m e tec worse and lead to even hr'*herwatr 9'e' riesctlos.
These new reactors will also cause Georgia Power to hike their rates. I remember that when Plant Vogtle became operational, Georgia Power had the largest rate increase in its history, mainly because the project was way over budget. Given that track record, I have no'connfidice that the new reactors will be any diferent.'hwnen Georga Power absorbed Sav~annhi"lectqcd tnev prorriseo muir
](I 10M T1 ýJ C,03 rIe wm'e -. "wer.,Expanilng vogtle to fathotour" reactors, especiall sosoon afer absorbig' Savan I- demonstrates bad fah on the (tOcoimpanys q
- past
... '"3* .';} .gh. fID'* _: ii' t)~k:'3 "*'. ,' *,' ".. * '...." .v - ;*,;.o ,* ". :;:
TIe company is also puittinig Savainri at risk, 'notjuist from' more rea*tor eimssiis, but from an accident or terrorist attack at the plant. There will be more reactors that are subject:*J; to6accdnts o;:; ! '
and,,of ai id,**of\
course, moree reactors
- ]:coulrse *;m o*: e .'*:¢i, ct r make the* plant !;:.::
a more attractive 'j target
)LL! )
ffo i~rtnousts:* ' *. ;ii, .. 3"* 72?
" i33 ' 1 ,.,.C"t ;2"i,.:;.):t,0: .I '-- , (3.'*
2 3 3 ~~i >,!
'... .7!.- ;',;' L Q,
~'
- f(7; !T133!(4 cP. J.r:,5b5.JC ~ '
i L..(.'4,:' :- 22OG /
.. ,'..,i" ,t .7 i ;' i ; * !1 1,,j! ' 2.* *' ' .1 .... K " .'
? i .- ,I L':* ';'q'" ( tC :v., :! t, u . .... , "". ".."
- 7. v '", '2 }:
- L 1 m.* .4;
- C[.i " Ai}[": i*:': :.',
'7. "3 "(p
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page 2 November 20, 2006 It will be bad enough evacuating the people living nearest to Vogtle in either case. Now consider what it would be like evacuating Savannah and the surrounding areas of Georgia and South Carolina, and with little or no warning.
Evacuating when a hurricane threatens is bad enough. Now consider the fact that the Commission has not extended the radius for potassium iodide distribution beyond ten miles from the plant. Whether we evacuate or shelter in place, the risk is too great and the "benefit" of new reactors does not overcome it.
Finally, this new "streamlined" process is essentially unfair. How can anyone anticipate all of the environmental impacts of new reactors at the very beginning of the process, yet there is only one time to discuss and evaluate them? Once the company banks the early site permit then later on some new unforeseen problem comes up, what happens then?
Just ignore it and press ahead.
By seeking new reactors for Plant Vogtle, Georgia Power is doing its ratepayers a major disservice. 4Instead of using expensive nuclear reactors that do not mitigate the problem of global warming the company should be investing in energy efficiency and power sources such as wind farms , solar panel stations, geothermal energy and certain forms of biomass to'mneet our energy needs. Efficiency investments alone would be the most cost effective and cut out the need for more nuclear reactors.
For these reasons, I urge the Commission to deny Southern Nuclear Operating Company'g'application for an Early Site Permit at Plant Vogtle.
Please mail me a card confirming your receipt of these comments and a copy of the draft Environmental Assessment when you publish it. I also ask that the Commission hold at least two hearings in Savannah to accept public comments on the draft, one during the day and one during the evening.
Thank you for the opportunity to share these comments with you.
Respectfully submitted, Jody Lanier