NRC review leaves out many factors

(Original publication: June 25, 2007)Journal News
NRC review leaves out many factors
Greg Clary's description of the Indian Point relicensing process as "an in-depth review of whether the plant can operate for an additional 20 years" (Friday story) is a portrayal that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission loves, but is really a gross overstatement because of the narrowly defined NRC regulations.
Among the things that the relicensing review does not include are the ongoing leaks of strontium 90 and cesium 137 from Indian Point 1 that pool under the plant and go into the Hudson River. The plant was shut down decades ago and the leaks were only discovered two years ago. Also excluded are the ongoing leaks of tritium from Indian Point 2 that were discovered by accident during construction work two years ago while the NRC often talks about their larger than normal presence at Indian Point because of the problem-plagued history of the plant.
The regulations exclude consideration of the corrosion of inaccessible pipes from using salt water for cooling. The NRC regulations also exclude the population density around the plant and a review of the laughable evacuation plan. The process excludes consideration of terrorist vulnerability and impact of a successful attack, and that the spent fuel pools are so overloaded that older wastes will now be stacked on an open concrete platform on the property to allow for more fresh high level wastes to be placed in the pools.
If this is an in-depth review, what is a cursory review? Come and ask the NRC yourself at the Colonial Terrace in Cortlandt Manor on Wednesday.
Gary Shaw
Croton-on-HudsonStop wasting money on more studies
Your June 18 article ("Spano seeks another $20G in nuke suit") begs the question: When are our legislators going to stop shelling out significant taxpayer money to go after Indian Point?
Already, County Executive Andrew Spano spent more than a half-million taxpayer dollars funding the redundant Levitan Associates study on Indian Point in 2005. At the federal level, $1 million went to the National Academy of Sciences study from 2006, and now Rep. John Hall, D-Dover Plains, wants to drop $10 million on a ridiculously wasteful "independent safety assessment" of the facility. Taxpayers should be up in arms.
The fact is that Indian Point's safe and reliable energy are crucial to the well-being of the region. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will also be thoroughly assessing Indian Point as part of the plants' license renewal application. Let's not waste any more taxpayer dollars on expensive law firms and redundant assessments, when common sense is all we need.
Laurent L. Lawrence
New Rochelle
The writer is executive director of the New York Affordable Reliable Electricity Alliance.