Indian Point licensing board needs more time

by Maireid Sullivan | June 20, 2008 at 06:24 pm

324 views | 5 Recommendations | 3 comments

Quite an interesting debate has developed around the pros and cons of Nuclear power on this link. Join in if you have information to share. As far back as June 2006, National Academy of Sciences Report Concludes Indian Point’s Power is Replaceable. And, you'll find an 'informative' interactive map here showing potential PEAK FATALITY / INJURY ZONES surrounding the reactor - basically the entire North Eastern USA. "Twenty million people live within a 50 mile radius of the Indian Point nuclear power plant on the Hudson River. A terrorist attack on the facility could have devastating consequences, rendering much of the Hudson River Valley, including New York City, uninhabitable." (forever!) This link presents the key facts supporting the case to close the Indian Point nuclear reactors.

Following are excerpts from two reports on the controversy around extending the license for the Indian Point Nuclear power plant.
20 More Years?
Relicensing Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant
Since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the Hudson Riverkeeper, along with a coalition of 70 citizen and environmental groups and a strong bi-partisan body of 400 federal, state, and local elected officials, has called for the shutdown and decommissioning of the Indian Point nuclear power plant located in Buchanan, NY. The plant is 24 miles north of the Bronx and 35 miles north of Times Square.

Due to its proximity to the world’s financial center and the severe consequences of a major accident or attack on public health, the environment, and the economy, Indian Point deserves special attention. Twenty million people live within a 50-mile radius of Indian Point. A terrorist attack on either of Indian Point’s two reactors or their spent fuel pools could render uninhabitable much of the tri-state area and indefinitely contaminate the watershed that supplies drinking water to 9 million people. That the plant sits atop an active fault line, destroys significant amounts of Hudson River aquatic life each day, and has an abysmal operations and safety record only compounds the arguments for closure. Read the entire article here

Indian Point licensing board needs more time

By Abby Luby, June 19, 2008, North Country News:––The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board needs more time to consider arguments that have been made against the re-licensing of the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plants.

NRC spokesperson Neil Sheehan said the panel had more than 150 contentions to consider.
“There have been motions and additional filings for the panel to sort though,” he said. “It’s not surprising that they are seeking the additional time.”

...

Sheehan said that the only other license application that is as active as the one for Indian Point is the Yucca Mountain Repository, the Nevada site poised to store spent radioactive waste from the nation’s nuclear power plants.

The ASLB panel determines if contentions filed by opposing organizations pose reasonable arguments against the continuing operation of the plant. If the panel rules in favor of certain arguments, the organizations are allowed to be heard in the formal license proceedings.
Among the organizations filing contentions in the fall of 2007 were Westchester County, the New York Attorney General's Office, Riverkeeper, Clearwater, Sierra Club, WestCAN, Rockland County Conservation, Connecticut Residents Opposed to Relicensing of Indian Point, Connecticut Attorney General's Office, and the Town of Cortlandt, Village of Buchanan, PHASE, New York City Economic Development Corp, NY AREA and FUSE. Each series of contentions filed were several thousand pages that needed to conform to specific NRC formatting. The contentions required in-depth legal preparation as well.

Marilyn Elie of WestCan, a local group seeking to close the plant and who submitted contentions, said the filing was expensive and time consuming for grass roots groups. She criticized the NRC for allowing the panel extra time.

“We have jumped through hoops and worked long hours to meet NRC deadlines that were unfair and unchangeable,” she said. “Giving the panel extra time is a prime example of how they change the rules whenever it suits them. The outcome is predictable. The agency is doing everything it can to re-license the plant.”

The NRC said that the re-licensing process only looks at how the utility company manages the interior components of an aging plant with attention given to age-related structural degradation of plant components like reactor cores, containment systems, pipes and electrical cables. Contentions filed have criticized the process for omitting any possibility for catastrophe including the plants location in a densely populated area, susceptibility to terrorist attacks, an inadequate evacuation plan and seismic issues.

Maireid Sullivan, I like this story. It's good stuff.

NowPublic

Environment

Indian Point licensing board needs more time

Photos