Entergy to install diesel backup power source at Indian Point 2
By GREG CLAYTHE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: June 22, 2007)
BUCHANAN -Energy Nuclear Northeast committed yesterday to installing a diesel backup power source for Indian Point 2, clearing the way for federal regulators to accept the nuclear plants' application to operate for an additional 20 years.
On Monday, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission sent a letter to officials from Energy Nuclear Northeast, which owns and operates Indian Point, saying that the relicensing application was incomplete and could not be accepted for review without more information.
Specifically, the regulatory agency wanted Energy to provide details on a natural gas-powered backup system or commit officially to installing a diesel system within a year.
Yesterday, Energy officials said they would do the latter.
"It simply boiled down to committing to install the backup diesel generator by a certain date, which we easily and gladly provided," said Energy spokesman Jim Streets.
NRC officials had given the nuclear plant 14 days to respond.
"The response from Energy was prompt," said NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan. "Now it will be up to us to review their submittal."
He said if the company doesn't deliver the new diesel system by next April 30, it could affect the agency's relicensing decision.
The highly technical relicensing process includes an in-depth review of whether the plant can operate for an additional 20 years. Energy provided information in the application on the proposed backup power, but neglected to include information about the current system.
Indian Point 3 already uses diesel power for its backup system, which is used in the event of a power outage to safely shut down the nuclear reactor.
Indian Point 2's license would be extended 20 years to 2033 and Indian Point 3's to 2035 if the joint application is approved by the NRC in the next 22 to 30 months.
The NRC routinely accepts relicensing applications within 45-60 days of submission after an initial review. The application was received April 30.
The NRC plans to hold two meetings Wednesday to inform the public about the license-review process. The meetings will be held at 1:30 and 7 p.m. at Colonial Terrace, a catering hall in Cortlandt.
Friday, June 22, 2007
Thursday, June 21, 2007
Entergy omits info on re-license application
North County News 6/2007Entergy omits info on re-license application
Missing the ‘Point’
By Abby Luby
Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant
Information was omitted by Entergy in their application to re-license the Indian Point Nuclear Power plants. The application to extend their operation for an additional 20 years is for reactor units 1 and 2 whose current licenses expires in 2013 and 2015, respectively. Entergy, the owner of the Buchanan based plant, submitted the application in April to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), the federal oversight agency.According to the environmental report section of the 2,500-page application submitted by Entergy on April 30, the company claims that the spent fuel pool in Unit 2 has not leaked since the 1990s and that recent findings of groundwater contaminated with tritium is from the older leaks. Omitted was the fact that wells near Unit 2 were tested in 2000 when Entergy purchased the plant from Con Edison and at that time no leaks or groundwater contamination was detected. The wells were tested again in October of 2005 after cracks were found in the spent fuel pool, which resulted in a high concentration of tritium in the ground water, indicating that a new leak occurred sometime during 2000 and 2005. This evidence was never mentioned in Entergy’s re-licensing application in keeping with their claim that there were no new leaks, a conflicting assertion to the NRC who in their March 16, 2006 Special Inspection Report on groundwater contamination at Indian Point, said the leak was new.Entergy’s application is posted in its entirety on the NRC’s website at http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applications.htm.l“It’s a question for Entergy—why they included some things and not others,” said NRC spokesperson Diane Screnci. “We’ve received it [the application] and we are looking at it initially. If there is more information we need to conduct the technical review then we will ask for more information.”Studying the report is policy analyst and attorney Phillip Musegaas of the environmental group Riverkeeper. Musegaas said that Entergy intentionally picked specific information to go into the environmental report of the re-licensing application.“What they’re doing throughout this report is choosing data to support their position and ignoring the current data,” he said. “Ignoring pieces of information goes against the NRC regulations that requires applications to be compete and accurate.”A June 4 letter to the NRC from Musegaas and Riverkeeper co-counsel Victor Tafur counters Entergy’s assertion that the leak is old because groundwater monitoring clearly indicated a tritium leak occurred at Unit 2 between 2000 and 2005. That would render the leak new.“The facts simply do not support Entergy’s assertion that the IP2 pool is no longer leaking or has not leaked since the 1990s,” they stated in the letter.
No mention of spent fuel pool searchEntergy’s claim that the leaks are old is based on their inability to find the source of the leaks in the liner of the Unit 2 spent fuel pool, the 40-foot-deep pool that stores used radioactive fuel assemblies. Also omitted from the re-licensing application was the fact that Entergy could only check 60 percent of the Unit 2 spent fuel pool liner. Last year Entergy hired divers to search the liner but could not reach the smaller spaces between the numerous storage racks near the bottom of the pool resulting in an incomplete search. In their re-licensing application Entergy didn’t include any plans to complete their search for leaks in the pool liner but Entergy spokesman Jim Steets said they are still pursuing ways to find the source of the leak. “There are some areas of the spent fuel pool we have not visually inspected but we now have a vender who is designing a camera that can do inspections in those very small areas that we haven’t yet seen.”Steets said data indicates the leaks are old. “We’re increasingly of the belief and growing in confidence that there is not an active leak in the pool,” he said. “We have a lot of data based on sampling from the many wells we’ve installed around the pools that tell us this leakage near IP2 was a one-time event.”
Structural status of aging plantNeil Sheehan, an NRC spokesman, said the re-licensing process only looks at structural problems of aging nuclear power plants and unless the irradiated water leaks are caused by actual cracks in the spent fuel pool, the NRC won’t consider the leaks relevant. “We haven’t made a determination if we will look at that [sent fuel pool cracks],” said Sheehan. “If it’s an aging management issue and if there is cracking on the exterior wall of the spent fuel pool, that could be raised as a contention.” Sheehan said the re-licensing process, which can continue as long as two years, looks only at how Entergy has managed an aging plant. “We look at the way Entergy will handle key safety systems and structural components,” he said.
Aquatic information also omittedEntergy also choose to ignore data from a 2003 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) on aquatic ecology in the Hudson River. The 2003 study said that the plant’s use of Hudson River water to cool their generators was having a negative impact on the river’s ecosystem by killing billions of fish and plants each year. Also harming aquatic life is the tremendous amount of hot water poured into the tidal estuary, said the report. In the re-licensing application, Entergy does reference the EIS about the decline in bay anchovy but omits the DEC’s findings on declining fish populations of American shad, white perch, Atlantic tomcod and rainbow smelt.“Entergy ignores the 2003 DEC conclusions and they relied on a 1999 draft EIS report done by Con Edison which was inconclusive about the impact on fish,” said Musegaas. “Those older conclusions drawn by the industry say that they are not having an impact on the fish.” Entergy references the 1999 study at least 11 times in their re-licensing application, Musegaas said.Sheehan said that the upcoming scoping meeting on the environmental section of the re-licensing application will examine those issues. “We will look at what the impact will be on aquatic life and plant life in the area,” he said. “A large part of the information in the environmental review will include the decision-making process.”The NRC can also impose conditions such as requiring a program that takes fish samples every month to determine whether there is an impact on aquatic species.Current problems not considered part of re-licensingThe public has scrutinized the NRC for not considering safety issues, especially since the plant is in a densely populated area and the 30-year-old evacuation plan is seen as unworkable. Also of concern is the failure of Entergy to locate the source of leaking irradiated water with isotopes Tritium and Strontium-90, a missed deadline for getting a new siren system up and running and more recently a malfunctioning water valve in one of the steam generators.Sheehan said those issues will not be examined as part of the re-licensing process because Entergy and the NRC deals with those issues on a day-to-day basis. “It’s understandable why people would want to raise those issues,” he said. “But these issues already have gotten a significant amount of attention and will continue to get attention.”In a statement emailed to the North County News Congressman John Hall (D/Dover Plains) said new legislation has been introduced that would require older power plants applying for license renewal to meet the same safety standards as new plants. Hall cosponsored the legislation, known as The Nuclear Power Licensing Reform Act of 2007 with Congressman Maurice Hinchey and Congresswoman Nita Lowey.“The Nuclear Power Licensing Reform Act will help to make sure that no corners are cut in the re-licensing process,” said Hall in his email. “This legislation has been referred to the House Energy and Commerce Committee where it is awaiting action.”The NRC has never turned down a nuclear plant’s relicesning application, Hall said.See page 19 for NRC meeting information.
Indian Point relicensing application incomplete, NRC says
Indian Point relicensing application incomplete, NRC says
By GREG CLARYTHE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: June 21, 2007)
BUCHANAN -Indian Point's application to operate for an additional 20 years won't be accepted by federal regulators until the nuclear plant can provide more information about how it operates in the event of a power outage.
Specifically, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission confirmed yesterday that its relicensing staff wants Indian Point officials to detail their current backup generator system at Indian Point 2, which relies on natural gas to power safety systems until the nuclear reactor can be shut down.
The company's application, submitted April 30 to the NRC, included information on a diesel-powered system that the company hasn't installed yet.
"This doesn't happen that often, but there have been applications that we have turned back," said NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan. "This happens to be one that doesn't have all the information we need."
Indian Point 2's license would be extended 20 years to 2033 and Indian Point 3's to 2035 if the joint application is approved by the NRC in the next 22 to 30 months.
The NRC routinely accepts relicensing applications within 45-60 days of submission after a detailed review, so the company will need to move quickly to keep the process on track, Sheehan said.
Lawrence Gottlieb, a spokes-man for Entergy Nuclear Northeast, the plants' owner and operator, said he expected Entergy officials to respond quickly.
"We will be as diligent as we can in trying to accommodate the NRC's additional requests," Gottlieb said. He said he didn't have details on the company's plans to move to diesel-powered generators for Indian Point 2's backup power source.
Sheehan said Entergy can solve the application's shortcoming by providing information on what exists so the agency can evaluate how well it would function for an additional 20 years, or formally commit to installing the diesel system before a draft safety assessment of Indian Point 2 is completed, likely about a year from now.
Sheehan said the agency asked for a response within 14 days of receipt of the advisory letter, which was written Monday.
He said the delay will not affect the NRC's plans to hold two meetings on Wednesday to inform the public on the license-review process. The meetings will be held at 1:30 p.m and 7 p.m. at Colonial Terrace, a catering hall in Cortlandt.
By GREG CLARYTHE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: June 21, 2007)
BUCHANAN -Indian Point's application to operate for an additional 20 years won't be accepted by federal regulators until the nuclear plant can provide more information about how it operates in the event of a power outage.
Specifically, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission confirmed yesterday that its relicensing staff wants Indian Point officials to detail their current backup generator system at Indian Point 2, which relies on natural gas to power safety systems until the nuclear reactor can be shut down.
The company's application, submitted April 30 to the NRC, included information on a diesel-powered system that the company hasn't installed yet.
"This doesn't happen that often, but there have been applications that we have turned back," said NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan. "This happens to be one that doesn't have all the information we need."
Indian Point 2's license would be extended 20 years to 2033 and Indian Point 3's to 2035 if the joint application is approved by the NRC in the next 22 to 30 months.
The NRC routinely accepts relicensing applications within 45-60 days of submission after a detailed review, so the company will need to move quickly to keep the process on track, Sheehan said.
Lawrence Gottlieb, a spokes-man for Entergy Nuclear Northeast, the plants' owner and operator, said he expected Entergy officials to respond quickly.
"We will be as diligent as we can in trying to accommodate the NRC's additional requests," Gottlieb said. He said he didn't have details on the company's plans to move to diesel-powered generators for Indian Point 2's backup power source.
Sheehan said Entergy can solve the application's shortcoming by providing information on what exists so the agency can evaluate how well it would function for an additional 20 years, or formally commit to installing the diesel system before a draft safety assessment of Indian Point 2 is completed, likely about a year from now.
Sheehan said the agency asked for a response within 14 days of receipt of the advisory letter, which was written Monday.
He said the delay will not affect the NRC's plans to hold two meetings on Wednesday to inform the public on the license-review process. The meetings will be held at 1:30 p.m and 7 p.m. at Colonial Terrace, a catering hall in Cortlandt.
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Rockland moving again on 311 hotline
Rockland moving again on 311 hotline
By SARAH NETTERTHE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: June 20, 2007)
Ever have a government question but no clue who to call?
It's been years in the making, but Rockland County is moving again on a 311 hotline to answer questions and give referrals on all government-related topics.
A $950,000 bond is working its way through County Legislature committees. The entire project is expected to cost about $2 million, but budget constraints have forced splitting the cost between this year and 2008.
"This year's budget was too tight so we decided to go with a less aggressive, more conservative plan," County Executive C. Scott Vanderhoef said.
Modeled in part on New York City's successful 311, Rockland's hotline would field complaints and questions on anything from potholes and fallen trees to passport procedures and human rights violations.
Rockland County already has a health and human services hotline in InfoRock, launched in 2004. And in 2005, the United Way of Rockland joined with other counties in the Lower Hudson Valley to offer 211, a social services referral line similar to InfoRock.
Vanderhoef said that InfoRock would merge with 311 once the latter was functioning.
The $950,000 up for approval this year would be used to buy software, licensing and other technical items, Vanderhoef said. The other half, in 2008, would be used for training, marketing and making the system "live."
Legislator and Majority Leader Michael Grant, D-Garnerville, said that legislators wanted more information before deciding to proceed with the project, including data from other communities that have 311 systems.
"There's some concern as to whether or not the value is there," he said.
InfoRock averages 1,000 calls a month, said David Farrison, the county's director of community relations. Industry standards for 311 systems are 1.5 calls per year per constituent. Rockland County is home to about 300,000 people.
InfoRock can be called at 364-2020 from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. Mondays through Fridays.
Farrison said it would be unrealistic to expect that kind of interest in 311 on the first day, and he noted that the industry standards are for government hotlines while InfoRock is strictly health and human services.
"I think we would have to build to that type of number," he said.
During the county's study into its own 311 system, some departments reported that 25 percent to 30 percent of their calls were meant for other departments, Farrison said. Having 311 would cut down on that and, in turn, free up employees to handle their own department's work.
Farrison said the county was looking into what kind of state reimbursement 311 could get, since InfoRock gets back up to 65 percent for referring calls.
Pedestrians in Nyack yesterday were supportive of 311.
Heather Haera of Valley Cottage said that she'd use such a system, especially for things like pool schedules and Indian Point siren testing.
Walking down Main Street with her young daughter, Jenni, Haera said it could be difficult to get government information and that she used Google or an informational packet published by the town.
"They send out a book if you live in Clarkstown ... with phone numbers that I keep," she said.
Daniela Mansfield said that once it's operating, the county should advertise the system so residents know it's available.
"I would use that if I knew that number exists," the Nyack resident said.
Vanderhoef said the 311 call center would be set up in the InfoRock space at the Dr. Robert L. Yeager Health Center in Ramapo. The current call center would need to be upgraded with more equipment and telephone lines, he said.
The county also would need to hire three people for 311, he said. InfoRock now has five full-time and two part-time employees.
By SARAH NETTERTHE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: June 20, 2007)
Ever have a government question but no clue who to call?
It's been years in the making, but Rockland County is moving again on a 311 hotline to answer questions and give referrals on all government-related topics.
A $950,000 bond is working its way through County Legislature committees. The entire project is expected to cost about $2 million, but budget constraints have forced splitting the cost between this year and 2008.
"This year's budget was too tight so we decided to go with a less aggressive, more conservative plan," County Executive C. Scott Vanderhoef said.
Modeled in part on New York City's successful 311, Rockland's hotline would field complaints and questions on anything from potholes and fallen trees to passport procedures and human rights violations.
Rockland County already has a health and human services hotline in InfoRock, launched in 2004. And in 2005, the United Way of Rockland joined with other counties in the Lower Hudson Valley to offer 211, a social services referral line similar to InfoRock.
Vanderhoef said that InfoRock would merge with 311 once the latter was functioning.
The $950,000 up for approval this year would be used to buy software, licensing and other technical items, Vanderhoef said. The other half, in 2008, would be used for training, marketing and making the system "live."
Legislator and Majority Leader Michael Grant, D-Garnerville, said that legislators wanted more information before deciding to proceed with the project, including data from other communities that have 311 systems.
"There's some concern as to whether or not the value is there," he said.
InfoRock averages 1,000 calls a month, said David Farrison, the county's director of community relations. Industry standards for 311 systems are 1.5 calls per year per constituent. Rockland County is home to about 300,000 people.
InfoRock can be called at 364-2020 from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. Mondays through Fridays.
Farrison said it would be unrealistic to expect that kind of interest in 311 on the first day, and he noted that the industry standards are for government hotlines while InfoRock is strictly health and human services.
"I think we would have to build to that type of number," he said.
During the county's study into its own 311 system, some departments reported that 25 percent to 30 percent of their calls were meant for other departments, Farrison said. Having 311 would cut down on that and, in turn, free up employees to handle their own department's work.
Farrison said the county was looking into what kind of state reimbursement 311 could get, since InfoRock gets back up to 65 percent for referring calls.
Pedestrians in Nyack yesterday were supportive of 311.
Heather Haera of Valley Cottage said that she'd use such a system, especially for things like pool schedules and Indian Point siren testing.
Walking down Main Street with her young daughter, Jenni, Haera said it could be difficult to get government information and that she used Google or an informational packet published by the town.
"They send out a book if you live in Clarkstown ... with phone numbers that I keep," she said.
Daniela Mansfield said that once it's operating, the county should advertise the system so residents know it's available.
"I would use that if I knew that number exists," the Nyack resident said.
Vanderhoef said the 311 call center would be set up in the InfoRock space at the Dr. Robert L. Yeager Health Center in Ramapo. The current call center would need to be upgraded with more equipment and telephone lines, he said.
The county also would need to hire three people for 311, he said. InfoRock now has five full-time and two part-time employees.
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Looking for the political fight over Indian Point? Don't look here
Looking for the political fight over Indian Point? Don't look here
(Original publication: June 18, 2007) Journal News
Nothing lasts forever, not even licenses to operate nuclear power plants. The license for Indian Point 2 expires in 2013 and the license for Indian Point 3 expires in 2015.The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is reviewing owner Entergy Nuclear Northeast's application to extend both for 20 years. The first public meetings on the application start later this month. The Editorial Board met last week with NRC licensing staff - P.T. Kuo, director of the license renewal division; Rani Franovich, licence renewal branch chief, and Bo Pham, manager for the Indian Point review. Excerpts from our discussion.
Why don't you run us through the re-licensing process. What does it entail?
Francovich: The process involves two parallel reviews, the safety review and the environmental reviews and there are submittals in the applications that are specific to each of those reviews. We are still in the process of performing our acceptance review. And that is where the NRC reviews both the environmental and safety submittals to verify that what is required by our regulations is indeed in the application. If we determine that those needs are met, we will officially accept the application and then there will be a 60-day window of opportunity to request a hearing. It also starts a 60-day scoping period for the environmental review that we did. A safety review is focused on how effective aging management will be for the continued period of operation, the additional 20 years it is being requested. So the focus of the safety review is to ensure that the plant will be maintained in a safe way so that is can continue to operate and meet all of its regulatory requirements in the future. The environmental review is conducted under the auspices of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). It is essentially the staff's review of the environmental impacts associated with 20 additional units of operation and discloses those impacts to the public. We use that information to inform our decision making on whether or not to renew a license.
The NRC has repeatedly rejected calls for an Independent Safety Assessment of Indian Point. Could you tell us exactly what an ISA is and how that differs from what we're getting?
Franovich: The ISA is a focused inspection that is being called for at Indian Point and the commission has essentially stated that the reactor oversight process that we currently have in place really incorporates all the features of an ISA plus more inspection and direct oversight, and the commission has stated that the reactor oversight process is adequate to address any concerns or identify any performance issues at the plant and so that's why the request for an ISA has been declined in the past.
Critics contend that if we were looking fresh at that property in Buchanan, we would never approve of a nuclear power plant so close to these major population centers.
Pham: The NRC's answer to that is that we don't know; we haven't seen an application for that but we do have a process in place for license renewal as well as (for new-reactor) licensing. I can't agree or disagree with you on that point at all because I don't know what the outcome of that review, if it happens, would be.
The public concerns about these plants are pretty well known; the leaks of nuclear material have gotten a lot of press. Most of us don't understand how many shutdowns is an inordinate number or whether most of your plants have sirens that work or don't work. The results of the last two-year study said that eight safety violations were found. What does that tell us about these plants?
Franovich: Performance issues today at the plant do not factor in to the license renewal review because we have ways of addressing those performance issues today. What we need to look at is how effectively they are going to manage the aging facility.
Is it possible to reassure people that these performance issues are being taken care of?
Pham: From a whole week here of doing outreach with the communities and county officials, perhaps we need to do a better job of communicating directly. We're saying our regulations are written so that we don't overlap the regulations. The current oversight process is there to protect the public from the plant operating there today. Instead of sending the message that its not part of the license renewal process we should try to reassure the public that we do look at these things and we are concerned about security, safety and public health.
Editor: We'll have more on the issues revolving around relicensing at Indian Point. Check back in this space, LoHud.com and NewsCenter Now.
(Original publication: June 18, 2007) Journal News
Nothing lasts forever, not even licenses to operate nuclear power plants. The license for Indian Point 2 expires in 2013 and the license for Indian Point 3 expires in 2015.The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is reviewing owner Entergy Nuclear Northeast's application to extend both for 20 years. The first public meetings on the application start later this month. The Editorial Board met last week with NRC licensing staff - P.T. Kuo, director of the license renewal division; Rani Franovich, licence renewal branch chief, and Bo Pham, manager for the Indian Point review. Excerpts from our discussion.
Why don't you run us through the re-licensing process. What does it entail?
Francovich: The process involves two parallel reviews, the safety review and the environmental reviews and there are submittals in the applications that are specific to each of those reviews. We are still in the process of performing our acceptance review. And that is where the NRC reviews both the environmental and safety submittals to verify that what is required by our regulations is indeed in the application. If we determine that those needs are met, we will officially accept the application and then there will be a 60-day window of opportunity to request a hearing. It also starts a 60-day scoping period for the environmental review that we did. A safety review is focused on how effective aging management will be for the continued period of operation, the additional 20 years it is being requested. So the focus of the safety review is to ensure that the plant will be maintained in a safe way so that is can continue to operate and meet all of its regulatory requirements in the future. The environmental review is conducted under the auspices of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). It is essentially the staff's review of the environmental impacts associated with 20 additional units of operation and discloses those impacts to the public. We use that information to inform our decision making on whether or not to renew a license.
The NRC has repeatedly rejected calls for an Independent Safety Assessment of Indian Point. Could you tell us exactly what an ISA is and how that differs from what we're getting?
Franovich: The ISA is a focused inspection that is being called for at Indian Point and the commission has essentially stated that the reactor oversight process that we currently have in place really incorporates all the features of an ISA plus more inspection and direct oversight, and the commission has stated that the reactor oversight process is adequate to address any concerns or identify any performance issues at the plant and so that's why the request for an ISA has been declined in the past.
Critics contend that if we were looking fresh at that property in Buchanan, we would never approve of a nuclear power plant so close to these major population centers.
Pham: The NRC's answer to that is that we don't know; we haven't seen an application for that but we do have a process in place for license renewal as well as (for new-reactor) licensing. I can't agree or disagree with you on that point at all because I don't know what the outcome of that review, if it happens, would be.
The public concerns about these plants are pretty well known; the leaks of nuclear material have gotten a lot of press. Most of us don't understand how many shutdowns is an inordinate number or whether most of your plants have sirens that work or don't work. The results of the last two-year study said that eight safety violations were found. What does that tell us about these plants?
Franovich: Performance issues today at the plant do not factor in to the license renewal review because we have ways of addressing those performance issues today. What we need to look at is how effectively they are going to manage the aging facility.
Is it possible to reassure people that these performance issues are being taken care of?
Pham: From a whole week here of doing outreach with the communities and county officials, perhaps we need to do a better job of communicating directly. We're saying our regulations are written so that we don't overlap the regulations. The current oversight process is there to protect the public from the plant operating there today. Instead of sending the message that its not part of the license renewal process we should try to reassure the public that we do look at these things and we are concerned about security, safety and public health.
Editor: We'll have more on the issues revolving around relicensing at Indian Point. Check back in this space, LoHud.com and NewsCenter Now.
Monday, June 18, 2007
Spano seeks another $20G in nuke suit
Spano seeks another $20G in nuke suit
By GLENN BLAINTHE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: June 18, 2007)
Taking the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission to court is proving a bit more expensive for taxpayers than Westchester County Executive Andrew Spano thought.
The Spano administration has asked the county Board of Legislators to authorize an additional $20,000 for the law firm hired by Westchester to take on the case. The request is now being considered by the board.
"It's very complex legally," Susan Tolchin, Spano's chief adviser, said of the case. "It is taking more money than we originally estimated."
Spano announced his intention to sue the NRC in February, after the agency rejected a county petition seeking to impose stricter criteria for older nuclear power plants - especially Indian Point in Buchanan -to gain new licenses.
The Board of Legislators in February authorized Spano to spend up to $60,000 on the law firm handling the case, Epstein, Becker and Green. Spano now wants to increase that amount to $80,000.
Legislator Michael Kaplowitz, D-Somers, chairman of the Budget and Appropriations Committee, said his committee planned to review Spano's request, but he declined to comment further.
Spano, who says Indian Point should be closed, wants the NRC to consider, among other issues, the region's population density and potential risk of terrorism when it decides whether to approve new licenses for the power plants.
"We feel we have a strong case," Tolchin said
NRC officials have maintained that changing the criteria is unwarranted. The agency looks almost exclusively at the operation of whatever plant is seeking a 20-year license renewal.
"We believe that the issues that are most important to consider are the aging-management program at the plant," NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said.
That program is "the way they will ensure that key safety systems and structures will be maintained," he said.
Sheehan, though, declined to criticize Spano's lawsuit.
"It's part of the process," Sheehan said. "There are checks and balances. If you are not happy with the decisions we make, you always have the option of pursuing it in federal court."
Entergy Nuclear Northeast, which owns and operates Indian Point 2 and Indian Point 3 in Buchanan, announced plans late last year to seek license extensions for both plants.
If granted, the renewals would allow the plants to operate until 2033 and 2035 respectively. The original 40-year licenses for Indian Point 2 will expire in 2013.
The NRC is planning to hold a pair of 90-minute public meetings on June 27 to outline the agency's license-review process. The meetings will be held at 1:30 p.m and 7 p.m. at Colonial Terrace, a catering hall in Cortlandt.
By GLENN BLAINTHE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: June 18, 2007)
Taking the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission to court is proving a bit more expensive for taxpayers than Westchester County Executive Andrew Spano thought.
The Spano administration has asked the county Board of Legislators to authorize an additional $20,000 for the law firm hired by Westchester to take on the case. The request is now being considered by the board.
"It's very complex legally," Susan Tolchin, Spano's chief adviser, said of the case. "It is taking more money than we originally estimated."
Spano announced his intention to sue the NRC in February, after the agency rejected a county petition seeking to impose stricter criteria for older nuclear power plants - especially Indian Point in Buchanan -to gain new licenses.
The Board of Legislators in February authorized Spano to spend up to $60,000 on the law firm handling the case, Epstein, Becker and Green. Spano now wants to increase that amount to $80,000.
Legislator Michael Kaplowitz, D-Somers, chairman of the Budget and Appropriations Committee, said his committee planned to review Spano's request, but he declined to comment further.
Spano, who says Indian Point should be closed, wants the NRC to consider, among other issues, the region's population density and potential risk of terrorism when it decides whether to approve new licenses for the power plants.
"We feel we have a strong case," Tolchin said
NRC officials have maintained that changing the criteria is unwarranted. The agency looks almost exclusively at the operation of whatever plant is seeking a 20-year license renewal.
"We believe that the issues that are most important to consider are the aging-management program at the plant," NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said.
That program is "the way they will ensure that key safety systems and structures will be maintained," he said.
Sheehan, though, declined to criticize Spano's lawsuit.
"It's part of the process," Sheehan said. "There are checks and balances. If you are not happy with the decisions we make, you always have the option of pursuing it in federal court."
Entergy Nuclear Northeast, which owns and operates Indian Point 2 and Indian Point 3 in Buchanan, announced plans late last year to seek license extensions for both plants.
If granted, the renewals would allow the plants to operate until 2033 and 2035 respectively. The original 40-year licenses for Indian Point 2 will expire in 2013.
The NRC is planning to hold a pair of 90-minute public meetings on June 27 to outline the agency's license-review process. The meetings will be held at 1:30 p.m and 7 p.m. at Colonial Terrace, a catering hall in Cortlandt.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)