The Sept 19th Indian Point Public Meeting

9/17/07

The Sept 19th Indian Point Public Meeting

The Sept 19th Indian Point Public Meeting - Focus

The NRC’s focus in relicensing of Indian Point for an additional 20 years

What the NRC deems “in scope” for relicensing Indian Point for another 20 years are safety issues related to the effects of aging on safety-related components and structures; however the NRC interprets the concept of safety-related extremely narrowly. Also in scope – and the focus of the September 19th meeting – are environmental considerations related to a 20 extension. These include:

Wildlife and Fish
Water and Air Resources
Historic or Cultural Resources
Taxes, Community Development
Environmental Justice
Land Use
Human Health

Basically, the NRC has designed rules to skew the process so as to allow the rubberstamping of relicensing applications. In fact the NRC has never denied any plant a new license. Under this regulatory schema:

The NRC will NOT consider the effect a major accident at Indian Point would have on the 300,000 people living within 10 miles, the nearly 1 million living within 20 miles, or the 21 million people living within 50 miles of the plant.

The NRC will NOT consider the location of Indian Point according to current siting standards.

The NRC will NOT look at the region’s actual emergency response capability, or the capacity of the local congested roadways to handle a mass evacuation, or the feasibility of truly protective sheltering for those unable to evacuate in time. (The sole independent expert assessment made of the Indian Point emergency plan – the Witt Report – spent over 500 pages detailing the flaws of the NRC/FEMA plan.)

The NRC will NOT factor in the health risks associated with living near Indian Point.

The NRC will NOT consider the fact that Indian Point is operated under a LLC structure, and that its $10 billion corporate parent, the Entergy Corporation, elected to let its New Orleans LLC subsidiary go bankrupt after Katrina rather than lend it the money needed for repairs.

The NRC will NOT consider Indian Point’s vulnerability to terrorist attack or the unique terrorist risks associated with a nuclear plant 24 miles from NYC. (Mohamed Atta, the hijacker who piloted the plane that struck the North Tower, considered redirecting the strike to the nuclear plant on the Hudson, according to 9/11 Commission investigation findings.)

The NRC will NOT consider the manner in which high level nuclear waste (also known as spent fuel) is maintained on site, or the fact that – to date – there exists no national depository that has been opened to accept nuclear waste from commercial reactors.

The NRC will NOT consider that, even if Yucca Mountain finally opens up, if Indian Point is relicensed for 20 more years, there will be no space at Yucca Mountain for all of the plant’s additional decades of nuclear waste to go.

The NRC will NOT take into account the numerous long-term hazards associated with high-level nuclear waste that will be stored on site, and will remain deadly for literally thousands of years.

And, unbelievably, the NRC will NOT even consider the overall safety and security track record of Indian Point’s operation.

Moreover, a few years ago, the NRC also changed its rules to cut out the public from meaningful participation in the relicensing process by eliminating the right of intervenors to (1) have public on-the-record hearings with sworn testimony; (2) to present expert witnesses to challenge the assertions of plant operators/NRC; and (3) to cross-examine witnesses of plant operators/NRC. Instead, we get meetings, where the NRC very nicely answers questions, but has absolutely no real accountability.

Notwithstanding, the NRC may have finally met its match in the Indian Point arena. The Indian Point Safe Energy Coalition is and the entire Lower Hudson Valley NY Congressional delegation are opposed to this creaky machine being allowed to continue leaking and puffing out its radionuclides into the environment. It’s REALLY important to make a strong public showing on September 19th, so do come if your can - and drag along a few friends!
The meeting will be held at the Colonial Terrace, located at 119 Oregon Road in Cortlandt Manor, NY. (914) 737-0400. IPSEC will be posting directions.
Michel

Michel Lee, Esq.
Steering Committee
Indian Point Safe Energy Coalition

(914) 420-5624
ciecplee@verizon.net

Fair Use Notice / Copyrights

Fair Use Notice This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml - If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Ten Reasons To Say No To Nuclear Power

1. Climate change is underway. Renewable energy can be brought online faster, more cheaply and more safely than nuclear power. 2. Reactors are sitting-duck targets and are not even defended to the ferocity of the 9/11 attacks. 3. Nuclear power is not emissions-free. Reactors routinely release radioactivity and use fossil fuels at every step from uranium mining to waste storage. 4. Building more reactors in the U.S. sends the wrong message abroad. Commercial nuclear technology inevitably leads to nuclear weapons capability. 5. The Yucca Mountain high-level radioactive dump is unsound and even if opened could not accommodate all wastes if generation continues. 6. Evacuation plans are unrealistic. Hurricane Katrina taught us that a mass evacuation during a serious radiological release would be a chaotic catastrophe. 7. A typical 1000 megawatt nuclear reactor produces enough plutonium each year to make 40 atomic bombs, an unacceptable risk. 8. New and old reactors are most prone to break down. U.S. reactors are old. New ones increase the risk of accident. 9. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission—mandated to watchdog the nuclear industry – chooses to protect industry profit over public health and safety. 10. The most defenseless are at the greatest risk—children, the elderly, minorities, the poor and animals—at every phase of the nuclear fuel chain. Ten Brighter Ideas 1. If every U.S. household installed one compact fluorescent light bulb, the power savings would equal the power produced by one nuclear reactor. 1=1! 2. Twenty compact fluorescents in every U.S. home could displace at least 25% of U.S. nuclear reactors. 3. Updated lighting, appliances, heating, cooling and other electrical systems can save more energy than all 103 U.S. reactors produce annually. 4. Cost-effective energy efficiency measures for homes and businesses can save at least 20% of electricity use. 5. Turning off and unplugging electrical equipment not in use and line-drying clothes seem like small measures but can make a big difference. 6. Homeowners and renters alike can choose to buy green power instead of nuclear generated electricity. 7. Properly sealing and insulating your home can save 25%-40% of building heat loss. 8. Renewable energy sources can meet 25% of U.S. energy needs by 2025. 9. Shifting to locally-generated electricity avoids waste, reduces brownouts and blackouts, increases efficiency of service and creates jobs. 10. Every dollar spent on nuclear power instead of fossil fuels results in releasing six times more carbon than if the same dollar is spent on efficiency. www.nirs.org 301.270.6477

"The No Nuker" - where No Nukes is good news !

9/17/07