ML18150A638
| ML18150A638 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 05/29/2018 |
| From: | Azarovitz J Pilgrim Legislative Advisory Coalition |
| To: | NRC/SECY/RAS |
| SECY/RAS | |
| References | |
| 83FR12504 00024, NRC-2018-0017, PRM-72-8 | |
| Download: ML18150A638 (2) | |
Text
PUBLIC SUBMISSIONAs of: 5/30/18 1:32 PMReceived: May 29, 2018Status: Pending_PostTracking No. 1k2-93f2-tpv6Comments Due: June 05, 2018 Submission Type: WebDocket: NRC-2018-0017Storing Spent Nuclear Fuel WasteComment On: NRC-2018-0017-0003Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear FuelDocument: NRC-2018-0017-DRAFT-0027Comment on FR Doc # 2018-05776Submitter InformationName: janet azarovitzAddress: west falmouth, MA, 02574Email: jazarovitz@comcast.netSubmitter's Representative: janet azarovitzOrganization: Pilgrim Legislative Advisory CoaltionGeneral CommentI am in agreement with the Citizens Oversight Inc. on this rule. Time is running out. Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station is going to close in a year but decommissioning plans are in consideration. Entergy responded to current consideration of lifting requirements days after the considerations were made public. The NRC MUST consider the safety of the public more seriously than it does presently, cow towing to the industry, literally the lapdog protector of the industry. The 14 contentions that are being brought forward would ensure safety and long-term planning, moving forward. The 1,000 year design and time-aging analysis to keep the hazardous material housed appropriately makes total sense. Nclear waste is one of those most toxic waste products known to man and must be guarded for practically eons. The proposed revisions are an absolute necessity. The red tape that the NRC has proposed to be eliminated demands that we need as much oversight as possible. We must refocus on the future, our future, our children's future and the future of our environment. The contentions brought Page 1 of 205/30/2018https://www.fdms.gov/fdms/getcontent?objectId=0900006483304a67&format=xml&showorig=false forward would allow this, and provide for estimates of funding. Sign this petition and let the Massachusetts Nuclear Decommissioning Citizen Advisory Panel that this is what they should be taking into consideration as well. Page 2 of 205/30/2018https://www.fdms.gov/fdms/getcontent?objectId=0900006483304a67&format=xml&showorig=false PUBLIC SUBMISSIONAs of: 5/30/18 1:32 PMReceived: May 29, 2018Status: Pending_PostTracking No. 1k2-93f2-tpv6Comments Due: June 05, 2018 Submission Type: WebDocket: NRC-2018-0017Storing Spent Nuclear Fuel WasteComment On: NRC-2018-0017-0003Requirements for the Indefinite Storage of Spent Nuclear FuelDocument: NRC-2018-0017-DRAFT-0027Comment on FR Doc # 2018-05776Submitter InformationName: janet azarovitzAddress: west falmouth, MA, 02574Email: jazarovitz@comcast.netSubmitter's Representative: janet azarovitzOrganization: Pilgrim Legislative Advisory CoaltionGeneral CommentI am in agreement with the Citizens Oversight Inc. on this rule. Time is running out. Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station is going to close in a year but decommissioning plans are in consideration. Entergy responded to current consideration of lifting requirements days after the considerations were made public. The NRC MUST consider the safety of the public more seriously than it does presently, cow towing to the industry, literally the lapdog protector of the industry. The 14 contentions that are being brought forward would ensure safety and long-term planning, moving forward. The 1,000 year design and time-aging analysis to keep the hazardous material housed appropriately makes total sense. Nclear waste is one of those most toxic waste products known to man and must be guarded for practically eons. The proposed revisions are an absolute necessity. The red tape that the NRC has proposed to be eliminated demands that we need as much oversight as possible. We must refocus on the future, our future, our children's future and the future of our environment. The contentions brought Page 1 of 205/30/2018https://www.fdms.gov/fdms/getcontent?objectId=0900006483304a67&format=xml&showorig=false forward would allow this, and provide for estimates of funding. Sign this petition and let the Massachusetts Nuclear Decommissioning Citizen Advisory Panel that this is what they should be taking into consideration as well. Page 2 of 205/30/2018https://www.fdms.gov/fdms/getcontent?objectId=0900006483304a67&format=xml&showorig=false