ML11280A197
| ML11280A197 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 09/27/2011 |
| From: | Radiance C - No Known Affiliation |
| To: | Dan Doyle Rulemaking, Directives, and Editing Branch, License Renewal Projects Branch 2, US Dept of Energy (DOE) |
| References | |
| 76FR54502 00019, NRC-2010-0029 | |
| Download: ML11280A197 (3) | |
Text
Gallagher, Carol From:
Sola' & Inayat [oneness@gorge.net]
Sent:
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 7:15 PM To:
Doyle, Daniel 2:3.
Cc:
markloper@hoanw.org 2: 3 9
Subject:
Docket number: NRC-2010-0029-PLEASE DENY COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR REACTOR AT HANFORD PROPOSAL.
Attention Daniel Doyle on behalf of DOE, My name is Chandra Radiance and I was on the 2pm NRC call. Due to your technical problems, we lost the call and wasted alot of time waiting for the call to come back together. That is not as efficient of a way to have testimony as coming to our region like you have in the past. We NEED local in-person representation here in Hood River, OR as it is such an important issue facing the public health and safety of our Columbia River gorge! Instead we just stopped our life to be on this conference call and got to listen to 'Elevator Music' for almost an hour!
I am irate that this agenda is even on the table after Fukushima just happened 6 months ago with the same type of GE MOX reactor that was not even operating at full capacity and still the after affects will be felt for millenium to come, whether the 'experts' admit it or not!
I tried to make my comment on the phone line today, but did not get to be heard. I am writing to say that we do not approve of operating the nuclear reactor at Hanford, WA due to the grave risks involved with radiation releases which could occur for any number of possible reasons, including and not limited to unsafe nuclear plant designs, radioactive waste still has no safe place to be stored, seismic activity, overloaded waste storage at facility which has NEVER been securely stored there or ANYWHERE EVER!
NRC regulators seem to have too close of contact with the nuclear industry itself (receiving kick backs) which allows them to look the other way when it comes to ensuring the public's welfare regarding relicensing nuclear power plants. Furthermore, none of these plants are insured against accidents because that would be too cost prohibitive and what insurance company will even do it? yet, we are all required to have auto insurance in case of an accident. As we all know, nuclear power plants are not immune from accidents!
When there are accidents at our nuclear power plants in the future, who will be able to afford to insure it's clean-up-our bankrupt government, the fine folks from GE who brought all this good technology, no not them either, nobody will be responsible! There is no such thing as getting anything with a half life of thousands of years cleaned up anyway!
NRC has not been enforcing the safety requirements and faults in the various other nuke plants which have been inspected are not up to safe levels of functioning. NRC instead chooses to lower the "safety standards" for allowable levels of radiation. This is criminal and we urge no re-licensing therefore of ANY archaic nuclear power plants nor building any new generation ones either since there is still no safe level of radiation!
The Desperation due to Current perceived economic conditions and limitation of power production for the USA's ever increasing demand for electricity for more quick energy and a way to try to recycle nasty plutonium are not at all compelling enough reasons to discount the value for the next generations to live safely in a nuclear free Columbia River Gorge. I do NOT wish for Hanford to be the next 'Fukushima type nightmare' and we have heard geologists say that the next big earthquake is predicted to be somewhere in the Cascade region of the NW.
We want our entire country to phase out of all Nuclear reactors in America! We believe these reactors add to the staggering cancer rates that are exponentially noted everywhere around them. Do not recycle nuclear waste into MOX plants and depleted uranium weapons: as a situation that affects the whole world, this should be a UN decision than a Washington state official decision. Whether it would be a UN or Congressional decision,they vote how Energy NW lobbyists tell them vote and receive monetary benefits for doing so, plus 60,/_
1,
,re 64-rr7
-e.1_
they are too not well educated about the extreme dangers of radioactive waste accidents. All the people voting for this are only thinking immediate economic and energy solutions, but not considering the long term costs of mitigating the damages of inevitable future problems with out-dated systems. The cost of any nuclear accident when factored into the equation would definitely make it cost prohibitive. Using highly dangerous Plutonium fuel (MOX) in any reactors is 100% unacceptable, this needs to be a public debate as it affects everyone! This should not be just a board room decision! The production and transport of Plutonium fuel is much too costly and dangerous of a security risk! This is a horrible idea because the 325 building and the high level storage facilities will not withstand the seismic activity which is probable to occur there sometime within the next 10-20,000 years!
Current disposal methods of this most toxic hazardous waste are not even adequate, minimally it needs to be in dry casks in case of fire. How in the world do any of you expect to claim this is "safe" for 24,000 years, who will be around to maintain all this mess?
In summary:
I insist that: NRC acknowledges that all human technology is fallible, yes, even Americans, and especially nuclear reactors! Even one small accident will be permanently irreversibly genetically destructive!
a) that the risks of using this fuel be disclosed in the EIS; b) that the NRC halt consideration of relicensing until we know what was damaged, how much radiation was released, and why, at the Fukushima Reactors - which could take a year or more due to the severe damage and radiation; and, c) Oregon's governance insist on enforcing that our health and safety l;*;p~ii!*
onsiderations are addressed since we live just on the other side of i:(
the river, an arbitrary boundary when it comes to escaped radioactive particles.
In addition to failing to consider the impacts and risks of the proposal to use Plutonium fuel, the EIS fails to:
A Disclose and consider the impacts of six major safety problems which NRC staff have formally reported as unresolved as of September 2011, including how - if even possible - Energy NW will ensure that embedded pipes will not fail over the next 50 years. ("Severe Accident Mitigation
- .Alternatives" 9-14)
- Take into account the unique - and dangerous - location of the reactor on the Hanford Nuclear Reservation. Urge the NRC to have the EIS disclose and consider the impacts if there is an explosion, fire, earthquake...
releasing radiation from Hanford facilities, preventing operation at the CGS reactor or recovery from an earthquake. Hanford's High-Level Waste tanks and highly contaminated buildings, including the nearby building that ENW proposes to use for Plutonium fuel, are not built to withstand anywhere near the potential earthquake that is possible.
Spent Fuel Pools at risk: much of Energy Northwest's fuel remains in a swimming pool above the reactor vessel - the same GE design as proved so dangerous at Fukushima. We urge removal to hardened concrete casks.
Where will the waste go??? The NRC conveniently says it will not consider this most important and logical question, but we all need to point to the 2
hypocrisy of ignoring it, especially at Hanford. The "low level waste" from this reactor goes to the leaking, unlined commercial radioactive waste landfill in the center of Hanford (which Heart of America Northwest and the Yakama Nation are suing to try to get cleaned up). The chemical and radioactive leaks are already dangerous and projected to be high enough to cause 5% of Native American children.
In Summary, I plead with you on behalf of the human species and the Universal ONENESS of all life which I humbly represent, PLEASE DENY COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR REACTOR AT HANFORD Facility. Do not allow RELICENSING TO OPERATE UNTIL 2043, or even to remain operative until 2023 for that matter! We urge you to PROTECT THE NORTHWEST FROM THE REACTOR USING THE SAME DANGEROUS PLUTONIUM FUEL AS FUKUSHIMA REACTOR!
Sincerely, Chandra Radiance 3