ML21069A035

From kanterella
Revision as of 18:12, 20 January 2022 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Comment (170) of Ed Mcardle on Notice of Intent to Conduct Scoping Process and Prepare Environmental Impact Statement; NextEra Energy Point Beach, LLC, Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2
ML21069A035
Person / Time
Site: Point Beach  NextEra Energy icon.png
Issue date: 03/03/2021
From: Mcardle E
- No Known Affiliation
To:
Office of Administration
References
86FR7747 00170, NRC-2020-0277
Download: ML21069A035 (3)


Text

3/9/2021 blob:https://www.fdms.gov/196dfba7-6ab9-4eb2-8ab4-a3128d2e8dd3 SUNI Review Complete As of: 3/9/21 1:47 PM Template=ADM-013 Received: March 03, 2021 PUBLIC SUBMISSION E-RIDS=ADM-03 ADD: Phyllis Clark, Bill Status: Pending_Post Tracking No. klu-602t-ir0r Rogers, Kevin Folk, Stacey Imboden, Mary Comments Due: March 03, 2021 Neely Submission Type: Web Comment (170)

Publication Date:2/1/2021 Docket: NRC-2020-0277 Citation: 86 FR 7747 Notice of Intent to Conduct Scoping Process and Prepare Environmental Impact Statement NextEra Energy Point Beach, LLC; Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Comment On: NRC-2020-0277-0001 Notice of Intent To Conduct Scoping Process and Prepare Environmental Impact Statement; NextEra Energy Point Beach, LLC, Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 Document: NRC-2020-0277-DRAFT-0175 Comment on FR Doc # 2021-02001 Submitter Information Name: Ed McArdle Address:

Waterford, MI, 48327 Email: ecoguy2@netzero.net Phone: (313) 415-1511 General Comment See attached file(s)

Attachments NRC-2020-0277-0001 blob:https://www.fdms.gov/196dfba7-6ab9-4eb2-8ab4-a3128d2e8dd3 1/1

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, March 3, 2021 Re: Point Beach, WI License Extension Michigan is especially vulnerable to any release of radionuclides to the air or waters of Lake Michigan. We are only 40 miles east of the nuclear station and downwind and downstream for most of the year. Weather patterns are from the northwest in the winter and from the southwest in the summer for the majority of the time. The west coast of Michigan is one of the best regions for growing fruit and other crops and a vibrant tourist destination and I am adamantly opposed to the 80-year license extension.

I have many concerns that should be addressed in the EIS. Namely, without cooling towers what effect does water containing up to 3200MW of heat discharged to Lake Michigan have on the biology of the lake? How far into the lake does the heated plume go? Is the lake water intake at a higher temperature, and along with projected increases of lake temperature due to climate change, will this elevated temperature have any effect on the internal reactor processes? What isotopes could be released to the air and water?

Will the reactors be inspected for embrittlement and other signs of aging before an extension is granted?

As a result of climate change, extreme weather events are already happening and are expected to intensify in the future. How prepared is the reactor site, as well as the dry casks, to survive violent storms, lake surges, flooding and other events? If the electric grid is down for any length of time, will outside generators be in operation for cooling of the core, and are they secure from weather effects?

How much waste will be produced after another 20 years of operation? The EIS should also address the increase in emissions of the nuclear fuel supply chain. This would mean more uranium mining, milling, enrichment, fabrication, and all the transport emissions with the accompanying radioactive contamination.

Environmental justice principles should also be considered. Uranium miners have suffered from increased health effects, such as leukemia and other cancers. A German study found that during inspection/refueling noble gases spiked up to 500 times above normal operations. This is particularly dangerous for children and pregnant mothers.

Children under five have experienced more cases of leukemia near reactors than children further away. Since Point Beach consists of two units that will refuel every 18

months, and if the time is staggered in half, it would mean spikes in radio isotopes every nine months.

Thank you for your consideration, Edward McArdle 5936 King James Lane Waterford, MI 48327 ecoguy2@netzero.net (313) 415-1511