ML13156A098
| ML13156A098 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 06/03/2013 |
| From: | Ammom C, Brennan P, Hurst J, Mercer M, Penrod J, Vivian N Public Commenter |
| To: | Annette Vietti-Cook NRC/SECY |
| Shared Package | |
| ML13156A099 | List: |
| References | |
| LTR-13-0482, RAS E-1348 | |
| Download: ML13156A098 (6) | |
Text
Remsburg, Kristy From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Jun 3, 2013 Annette Vietti-Cook
Dear Vietti-Cook,
Riverkeeper <info@Riverkeeper.org> on behalf of JM Penrod
<bdjmpenrod@yahoo.com>
Monday, June 03, 2013 9:18AM NRCExecSec Resource Close Indian Point until it can be proven safe Columbia University says the risk of an earthquake as large as 7.0 on the Richter scale is quite possible at Indian Point. Entergy admits it can't handle an earthquake of this magnitude and that at best the plant could withstand a magnitude 6.1 earthquake. This is highly significant because the energy released in a 7.0 level earthquake is roughly 30 times more powerful than a 6.1. In light of the devastating problems facing the nuclear power plants in Japan and the news surrounding the resurrected 2008 Columbia University Earth Observatory study, I respectfully call upon you to close Indian Point until it can be proven safe.
The NRC specifically denied New York State's demand thatthis issue be examined as part of the relicensing review. As of now, the NRC is basing its conclusion that Indian Point will withstand an earthquake on seismic studies done nearly forty years ago, when the plant was built.
I am writing to urge an immediate, objective and independent analysis of this risk and its implications for plant operation, emergency response and evacuation planning.
Only 24 miles from Manhattan, Indian Point is a nuclear plant with one of the highest surrounding population densities in the.United States, with 20 million people within a 50 mile radius. If an earthquake or other disaster led to a rapid release of radioactivity, there is no plan currently in place to effectively evacuate the surrounding population without placing people at risk.
Entergy is a very profitable company (it is projected to make $17 billion over its proposed 20 year extended operating life). It can afford to shut down for a sufficient amount of time, for example 3 months like the nuclear reactors in Germany, so that a proper review can be conducted about Indian Point's vulnerabilities and its ability to withstand an earthquake. In addition, spent fuel needs to be moved out of the poorly-protected pools on sight and into safer dry-cask storage.
If acted upon now, these are measures that can help protect millions of lives.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely, Ms. JM Penrod 6528 State Route 15a Springwater, NY 14560-9603 1
Remsburg, Kristy From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Jun 3, 2013 Annette Vietti-Cook
Dear Vietti-Cook,
Riverkeeper <info@Riverkeeper.org> on behalf of Nick Vivian <nickvivian@gmail.com>
Monday, June 03, 2013 2:19 PM NRCExecSec Resource Close Indian Point until it can be proven safe Columbia University says the risk of an earthquake as large as 7.0 on the Richter scale is quite possible at Indian Point. Entergy admits it can't handle an earthquake of this magnitude and that at best the plant could withstand a magnitude 6.1 earthquake. This is highly significant because the energy released in a 7.0 level earthquake is roughly 30 times more powerful than a 6.1. In light of the devastating problems facing the nuclear power plants in Japan and the news surrounding the resurrected 2008 Columbia University Earth Observatory study, I respectfully call upon you to close Indian Point until it can be proven safe.
The NRC specifically denied New York State's demand that this issue be examined as part of the relicensing review. As of now, the NRC is basing its conclusion that Indian Point will withstand an earthquake on seismic studies done nearly forty years ago, when the plant was built.
I am writing to urge an immediate, objective and independent analysis of this risk and its implications for plant operation, emergency response and evacuation planning.
Only 24 miles from Manhattan, Indian Point is a nuclear plant with one of the highest surrounding population densities in the United States, with 20 million people within a 50 mile radius. If an earthquake or other disaster led to a rapid release of radioactivity, there is no plan currently in place to effectively evacuate the surrounding population without placing people at risk.
Entergy is a very profitable company (it is projected to make $17 billion over its proposed 20 year extended operating life). It can afford to shut down for a sufficient amount of time, for example 3 months like the nuclear reactors in Germany, so that a proper review can be conducted about Indian Point's vulnerabilities and its ability to withstand an earthquake. In addition, spent fuel needs to be moved out of the poorly-protected pools on sight and into safer dry-cask storage.
If acted upon now, these are measures that can help protect millions of lives.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely, Mr. Nick Vivian 1224 St Nicholas Ave New York, NY 10032-1949 1
Remsburg, Kristy From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Jun 3, 2013 Annette Vietti-Cook
Dear Vietti-Cook,
Riverkeeper <info@Riverkeeper.org> on behalf of Patrick Brennan <pjbsl@aol.com>
Monday, June 03, 2013 3:11 PM NRCExecSec Resource Close Indian Point until it can be proven safe Columbia University says the risk of an earthquake as large as 7.0 on the Richter scale is quite possible at Indian Point. Entergy admits it can't handle an earthquake of this magnitude and that at best the plant could withstand a magnitude 6.1 earthquake. This is highly significant because the energy released in a 7.0 level earthquake is roughly 30 times more powerful than a 6.1. In light of the devastating problems facing the nuclear power plants in Japan and the news surrounding the resurrected 2008 Columbia University Earth Observatory study, I respectfully call upon you to close Indian Point until it can be proven safe.
The NRC specifically denied New York State's demand that this issue be examined as part of the relicensing review. As of now, the NRC is basing its conclusion that Indian Point will withstand an earthquake on seismic studies done nearly forty years ago, when the plant was built.
I am writing to urge an immediate, objective and independent analysis of this risk and its implications for plant operation, emergency response and evacuation planning.
Only 24 miles from Manhattan, Indian Point is a nuclear plant with one of the highest surrounding population densities in the United States, with 20 million people within a 50 mile radius. If an earthquake or other disaster led to a rapid release of radioactivity, there is no plan currently in place to effectively evacuate the surrounding population without placing people at risk.
Entergy is a very profitable company (it is projected to make $17 billion over its proposed 20 year extended operating life). It can afford to shut down for a sufficient amount oftime, for example 3 months like the nuclear reactors in Germany, so that a proper review can be conducted about Indian Point's vulnerabilities and its ability to withstand an earthquake. In addition, spent fuel needs to be moved out of the poorly-protected pools on sight and into safer dry-cask storage.
If acted upon now, these are measures that can help protect millions of lives.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely, Mr. Patrick Brennan 2 Grove Ln Ardsley, NY 10502-1009 (908) 482-0344 1
Remsburg, Kristy From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Jun 3, 2013 Annette Vietti-Cook
Dear Vietti-Cook,
Riverkeeper <info@Riverkeeper.org> on behalf of Clifford Ammom <cammon2
@nycap.rr.com>
Monday, June 03, 2013 8:58 PM NRCExecSec Resource Close Indian Point until it can be proven safe Columbia University says the risk of an earthquake as large as 7.0 on the Richter scale is quite possible at Indian Point. Entergy admits it can't handle an earthquake of this magnitude and that at best the plant could withstand a magnitude 6.1 earthquake. This is highly significant because the energy released in a 7.0 level earthquake is roughly 30 times more powerful than a 6.1. In light of the devastating problems facing the nuclear power plants in Japan and the news surrounding the resurrected 2008 Columbia University Earth Observatory study, I respectfully call upon you to close Indian Point until it can be proven safe.
The NRC specifically denied New York State's demand that this issue be examined as part of the relicensing review. As of now, the NRC is basing its conclusion that Indian Point will withstand an earthquake on seismic studies done nearly forty years ago, when the plant was built.
I am writing to urge an immediate, objective and independent analysis of this risk and its implications for plant operation, emergency response and evacuation planning.
Only 24 miles from Manhattan, Indian Point is a nuclear plant with one of the highest surrounding population densities in the United States, with 20 million people within a 50 mile radius. If an earthquake or other disaster led to a rapid release of radioactivity, there is no plan currently in place to effectively evacuate the surrounding population without placing people at risk.
Entergy is a very profitable company (it is projected to make $17 billion over its proposed 20 year extended operating life). It can afford to shut down for a sufficient amount oftime, for example 3 months like the nuclear reactors in Germany, so that a proper review can be conducted about Indian Point's vulnerabilities and its ability to withstand an earthquake. In addition, spent fuel needs to be moved out of the poorly-protected pools on sight and into safer dry-cask storage.
If acted upon now, these are measures that can help protect millions of lives.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely, Mr. Clifford Ammom 238 Nelson Ave Saratoga Springs, NY 12866-3419 1
Remsburg, Kristy From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Jun 4, 2013 Annette Vietti-Cook
Dear Vietti-Cook,
Riverkeeper <info@Riverkeeper.org> on behalf of June Hurst <junehurst@yahoo.com>
Tuesday, June 04, 2013 12:00 PM NRCExecSec Resource Close Indian Point until it can be proven safe Columbia University says the risk of an earthquake as large as 7.0 on the Richter scale is quite possible at Indian Point. Entergy admits it can't handle an earthquake of this magnitude and that at best the plant could withstand a magnitude 6.1 earthquake. This is highly significant because the energy released in a 7.0 level earthquake is roughly 30 times more powerful than a 6.1. In light of the devastating problems facing the nuclear power plants in Japan and the news surrounding the resurrected 2008 Columbia University Earth Observatory study, I respectfully call upon you to close Indian Point until it can be proven safe.
The NRC specifically denied New York State's demand that this issue be examined as part of the relicensing review. As of now, the NRC is basing its conclusion that Indian Point will withstand an earthquake on seismic studies done nearly forty years ago, when the plant was built.
I am writing to urge an immediate, objective and independent analysis of this risk and its implications for plant operation, emergency response and evacuation planning.
Only 24 miles from Manhattan, Indian Point is a nuclear plant with one of the highest surrounding population densities in the United States, with 20 million people within a 50 mile radius. If an earthquake or other disaster led to a rapid release of radioactivity, there is no plan currently in place to effectively evacuate the surrounding population without placing people at risk.
Entergy is a very profitable company (it is projected to make $17 billion over its proposed 20 year extended operating life). It can afford to shut down for a sufficient amount of time, for example 3 months like the nuclear reactors in Germany, so that a proper review can be conducted about Indian Point's vulnerabilities and its ability to withstand an earthquake. In addition, spent fuel needs to be moved out of the poorly-protected pools on sight and into safer dry-cask storage.
If acted upon now, these are measures that can help protect millions of lives.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely, Ms. June Hurst 215 E 95th St Apt 9h New York, NY 10128-4080 1
Remsburg, Kristy From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Jun 5, 2013 Annette Vietti-Cook
Dear Vietti-Cook,
Riverkeeper <info@Riverkeeper.org> on behalf of Michele Mercer <michelemSSS
@gmail.com>
Wednesday, June 05, 2013 4:07 AM NRCExecSec Resource Close Indian Point until it can be proven safe Columbia University says the risk of an earthquake as large as 7.0 on the Richter scale is quite possible at Indian Point. Entergy admits it can't handle an earthquake of this magnitude and that at best the plant could withstand a magnitude 6.1 earthquake. This is highly significant because the energy released in a 7.0 level earthquake is roughly 30 times more powerful than a 6.1. In light of the devastating problems facing the nuclear power plants in Japan and the news surrounding the resurrected 2008 Columbia University Earth Observatory study, I respectfully call upon you to close Indian Point until it can be proven safe.
The NRC specifically denied New York State's demand that this issue be examined as part of the relicensing review. As of now, the NRC is basing its conclusion that Indian Point will withstand an earthquake on seismic studies done nearly forty years ago, when the plant was built.
I am writing to urge an immediate, objective and independent analysis of this risk and its implications for plant operation, emergency response and evacuation planning.
Only 24 miles from Manhattan, Indian Point is a nuclear plant with one of the highest surrounding population densities in the United States, with 20 million people within a 50 mile radius. If an earthquake or other disaster led to a rapid release of radioactivity, there is no plan currently in place to effectively evacuate the surrounding population without placing people at risk.
Entergy is a very profitable company (it is projected to make $17 billion over its proposed 20 year extended operating life). It can afford to shut down for a sufficient amount of time, for example 3 months like the nuclear reactors in Germany, so that a proper review can be conducted about Indian Point's vulnerabilities and its ability to withstand an earthquake. In addition, spent fuel needs to be moved out of the poorly-protected pools on sight and into safer dry-cask storage.
If acted upon now, these are measures that can help protect millions of lives.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely, Ms. Michele Mercer 1548 E Elegante Dr CasaGrande, AZ 85122-5842 (520) 423-1934 1