Hudson River Revival addresses global issues

Thursday, June 14, 2007 - Poughkeepsie Journal
Hudson River Revival addresses global issues
Weekend fest features musical lineup, exhibits, food and more
Canadian singer-songwriter Bruce Cockburn some time ago was driving from St. Louis to Kansas City on his way to Los Angeles through a landscape that featured not much more than rolling hills and billboards.
Along with anti-abortion billboards and billboards advertising sex clubs, there was one for tattoos that really caught Cockburn's eye.
"It said, 'Mike's Tattoos, Done While You Wait,' " Cockburn recalled this week during a telephone interview with the Journal. "I thought, 'That's got to be in a song.' "
That image found its way into a song, "Life Short Call Now," the title track of Cockburn's most recent record. The song and album title, Cockburn said, draw inspiration from the "infomercial" society some of us live in, but was also written while he was between relationships.
"There was nobody lining up to call me," he said. "I thought, 'Somebody is out there that can offer an alternative to the loneliness of the road.' As it turns out, there was."
The long road Cockburn has traveled will lead him to the Hudson Valley Sunday, when the guitarist is set to perform solo at the the 41st Clearwater Festival, an annual gathering at Croton Point Park in Westchester.
The Poughkeepsie-based environmental organization Clearwater was founded by Fishkill resident and folksinger Pete Seeger to raise awareness of environmental challenges facing the Hudson River. The festival runs Saturday and Sunday, with a wide range of activities and music by the Cowboy Junkies, Leo Kottke and Seeger, whom Cockburn called "a moral and musical influence ... on the American scene."
"We've been trying to get Bruce for a long time," said festival director Ron Aja. "He is one of the kindred spirits. He cares about the world, he cares about the environment."
Cockburn has over his decades-long career addressed in song many of the issues Clearwater has tackled - nuclear power, clean water and mankind's overall destruction of the environment, among them.
Cockburn, in his music, also addresses intimate personal relationships, as well as far-reaching global issues like the fallout of war. The release of "Life Short Call Now" followed a trip he took to Iraq after the U.S. invasion.
Similar journeys Cockburn has taken to Nepal and Nicaragua have also inspired songs, and his albums serve as something of a diary of his journeys. He could play those songs Sunday at Clearwater, when the woven, meditative finger-picking that is a staple of his guitar playing will be punctuated by singing that moves effortlessly between a roar, a quiver and a whisper.
Cockburn recently traveled to Venezuela and was there for that country's elections.
"There is a sense of people being drunk with hope," he said. "The hope was there and it was really exciting."
Cockburn, however, hasn't written any songs about the trip.
But, "You never know," he said. "... I took a lot of notes, as I generally do when I go on a trip."
Cockburn's performance in Westchester will put him on the shores of a river polluted by a global corporation, General Electric; and several miles from a nuclear power plant - Indian Point - that has generated a lot of controversy. Both the river and the power plant could easily end up in a Cockburn song.
"The imagery is powerful," he said. "... It seems appropriate for me to play an event like this."
At the heart of this man, though, along with the issues he sings about, is the music. Truly, Cockburn and Seeger are, as Aja put it, "kindred spirits."
"Pete Seeger," Cockburn said, "is an unimpeachable image of integrity."

US NRC 'torn' on how to proceed with GNEP: Commissioner Lyons

US NRC 'torn' on how to proceed with GNEP: Commissioner Lyons
Washington (Platts)--12Jun2007
The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission is "torn" on how to proceed with the
Department of Energy's Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, NRC commissioner
Peter Lyons said Tuesday.
In remarks before the Global Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing and Recycling
conference in Seattle, Lyons said the agency does not have "sufficient
certainty" from the Bush administration and Congress to know what resources
need to be assigned, and on what time scale, to develop a framework for
licensing facilities under GNEP, an initiative to develop new types of
reprocessing plants and fast reactors.
In determining fiscal 2008 funding levels, there have been differences
between the administration and Congress, as well as within the administration,
over the urgency of GNEP work.
Lyons also emphasized that spent fuel is now safely stored at reactor
sites, although there could be debates over whether such an approach is
"desirable." NRC commissioners now are considering a staff proposal for a
two-phased approach to setting up a GNEP licensing regime.

Warning system won't accomplish anything

Letter to the Editor - Journal News
June 13, 2007
Warning system won't accomplish anything
I watch with amazement the continuing saga regarding the deployment of the warning system for the Indian Point nuclear reactor. Has anyone considered the effectiveness of such a warning system? Assuming the sirens are heard and it is not a test, what exactly would the public do? Anyone who drives in the Westchester area is well aware of the snaring traffic due to volume and aggravated by construction. The other day I traveled over the Tappan Zee Bridge at midday to avoid traffic and it took me 25 minutes to traverse the bridge. Does anyone really believe that Westchester could be timely evacuated? I would rather have had the time, effort and expense spent on employee training, inspections and prophylactic repairs to avoid a major disaster.
Joel Schwartz
Elmsford

NRC: Indian Point fines won't go to county coffers

NRC: Indian Point fines won't go to county coffers
By GREG CLARYTHE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: June 12, 2007)
WHITE PLAINS - The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has rejected Westchester County's request that Indian Point's $130,000 fine for failing to install emergency sirens on time be spread among the four counties within 10 miles of the nuclear reactors to defray emergency preparation costs.
"It's government 1, the people 0," said Susan Tolchin, chief adviser to Westchester County Executive Andrew Spano. The NRC was "right to give Entergy a penalty on this, but the bottom line is, funnel that money to the counties whose taxpayers are paying for emergency services."
The federal nuclear regulators fined Entergy Nuclear Northeast, the owner of Indian Point, for missing its April 15 deadline to install a new emergency alert system.
The company has since vowed to have the sirens operating by August. In the meantime, residents of Westchester, Rockland, Putnam and Orange counties must rely on a decades-old set of 156 sirens with a spotty performance record in the past two years.
Indian Point's siren system is used to alert residents of an emergency at the plant and to signal them to check their televisions or radios for further instructions.
The 150 new sirens, which will have backup battery power and can be sounded through cell antennas or radio systems, eventually will replace the existing system.
In a letter dated Friday, Cynthia Carpenter, director of the NRC's Office of Enforcement, said the agency was required to deposit the fine money into the U.S. Treasury rather than send it to local governments.
"The NRC does not have the authority to redirect such funds for nonappropriated programs," Carpenter wrote to Anthony Sutton, Westchester County's commissioner of emergency services. "As such, the NRC is unable to honor your request."
NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said the agency has no latitude on the issue because of the federal Miscellaneous Receipts Act, which controls how money paid to the U.S. government must be handled.
"The Miscellaneous Receipts Act is designed to guarantee that Congress retains control of the public purse," Sheehan said. "It would take legislation to allow us to do this, and there isn't anything pending."
Tolchin said that the county would talk to its congressional representatives, who had already voiced their support of local municipalities receiving the fine money.
Entergy officials reiterated yesterday that the discussion of who ultimately gets the fine money doesn't involve them.
Sutton pressed the NRC in his May 15 letter to follow precedent that has allowed the Environmental Protection Agency to direct money elsewhere, but Sheehan said his agency's research showed that those transactions have not involved third parties.
Reach Greg Clary at 914-696-8566 or gclary@lohud.com.

TOP OF PAGE
Post a Comment View All Comments
Susan Tolchin claims that it’s Government 1 the People 0, as if this is a game. From my perspective, Susan Tolchin represents government (bad government). Andrew Spano is government (also bad government). NRC, too, is government. Although in my book, the NRC is the only agency mentioned that is non-political and actually performs with integrity. Perhaps this is what irks pretend-to-be-greens so much. The NRC regulates based on their code of federal regulations (10CFR) and is (usually) not swayed by politics, but instead relies on facts.
Posted by: nuclear environmentalist on Tue Jun 12, 2007 1:20 pm

The old siren system is still operating, and the new siren system is also available. In effect, there are now two redundant siren systems. TJN implies that there is currently no siren system. Wrong, as usual.
Posted by: nuclear environmentalist on Tue Jun 12, 2007 5:43 am

Greg Clary writes: "In the meantime, residents of Westchester, Rockland, Putnam and Orange counties must rely on a decades-old set of 156 sirens with a spotty performance record in the past two years." This is not quite the absolute truth. The old sirens have tested at 100% , during the last few periodic tests in spring 2007. Therefore saying "The people must rely on" implies some problem which isn't present. Moreover, no incident requiring the live use of the sirens has ever occurred, so they are more of an addendum, than a real protection of any kind, with or without battery backup. Everybody knows this, but the politico-journalistic complex feathers its own nest by harping on irrelevancies, and stoking the ashes of a long-burnt-out issue , all while allowing no new power plants to be built. Thus we see the local media aiding the local elected cadre to personally fail their duties to provide, while ineffectively whipping the only whipping boy left to them, the white elephant never-to-be-used siren system. In Ontario Canada, where the counties own the responsibility to provide emergency plans for their nuclear stations, a complete siren system was ordered, and delivered , but the county decided in a referendum that they would be too annoying and disruptive, so never installed them. In this same county, plans are under way for new Candu reactors, to meet expected power needs. Thus we see how municipalities NOT straitjacketed by the do-nothing Spano/TJN chokehold, are actually overcoming issues that seem to strangle and paralyze the Lower Hudson. Strange, isn't it?
Posted by: la_88 on Tue Jun 12, 2007 3:20 am

Power deals elude the state

Saturday, June 9, 2007 - Poughkeepsie Journal
Power deals elude the state
The state's rules allowing power plants to be built expired about four years ago - and each year, New York's demand for energy grows.
Yet, lawmakers can't bring themselves to put together a reasonable deal that allows for new construction. But they put a premium on environmental protection.
They need to sort this out, and fast.
To be sure, more power plants aren't the sole answer to the state's energy problems. Conservation efforts - including strengthening efficiency standards in appliances and providing utilities with more incentives to promote energy-use reductions - must be part of the equation. Gov. Eliot Spitzer recently released a comprehensive plan that would do just that. But the governor, as well as the state Assembly and Senate, recognize the need to increase supply as well. They are at odds, in part, over which type of power plants should be given "fast-track'' status.
The Senate would allow any power source, including nuclear and all types of coal, to qualify as long as certain pollution standards are being met.
The Assembly is more in line with Spitzer's thinking: If the state is going to offer fast-track incentives, it should do so for the plants releasing the lowest amount of emissions. They also argue that offering faster approval for nuclear plants is essentially moot since a lengthy federal review process is required in these instances.
Ironcially, the now-defunct siting law, known as Article X, was created to streamline the process for industry to build new power plants. But opponents who correctly argued the reviews also steamrolled any opposition to particular sites as a result. For instance, the old Article X law didn't spell out that utilities must offer alternative sites for what they were proposing. Article X also exempted smaller power plants from some important environmental reviews. As in years past, the Assembly's version rectifies these matters more comprehensively than the Senate's.
State energy costs soar above the rest
While the two houses continue their dispute, some matters are beyond argument. Several reputable studies, including one from the U.S. Department of Energy, say that within a few years New York is going to need more power than it is generating. The state's energy costs are among the highest in the nation. Without new sources of energy, they won't be coming down soon.
Meanwhile, the state's plants - including the nuclear-powered Indian Point and several others near the Hudson River - continue to age, having been built between between 1955 and 1976. Their licenses continue to be extended, even though they don't run nearly as efficiently or cleanly as new plants in regard to emission standards and/or their cooling systems. These plants use Hudson River water to cool their generation equipment, destroying billions of fish eggs and larvae as a result, despite screens that are supposed to mitigate the devastation.
The state should be paying more attention to which energy sources and policies are best in the long term. It can't afford to stall on this issue much longer. Getting any type of power plant built is never going to be easy. But without a law offering a road map, the difficult becomes the impossible.

Indian Point's bid for license renewal generates much heat in court of public opinion

Indian Point's bid for license renewal generates much heat in court of public opinion
Entergy wants to operate Indian Point’s nuclear reactors for another 20 years.


By Greg BrunoTimes Herald-Record June 06, 2007

Buchanan — As emergency officials were tracking the source of radioactive water found in sewage here last month, Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore was in Manhattan, ticking off reasons why Indian Point should operate for another 20 years.
Not the best timing, perhaps.
But Moore's controversial message was not completely clouded by the ill-fated coincidence. He did manage to get a few glowing editorials, and was proclaimed "one of the sanest people on the issue of climate change" by The New York Sun.
Such is the battle for public opinion at Indian Point.
In the five weeks since Entergy Nuclear Northeast submitted an application for the 20-year renewal of its licenses, which expire in 2013 and 2015, press releases and pronouncements have flown from plant supporters and critics alike.
Paul Newman, of Hollywood and salad dressing fame, became the latest celebrity to throw his name behind the plant. Some scoffed at Newman's credentials, and The Record's own editorial board labeled the Hollywood icon a propagandist.
But Jim Steets, a spokesman for plant owner Entergy, defended Newman's observations. "Paul Newman is much more engaged in environmental and specifically nuclear issues than The Record gives him credit for," Streets wrote in an e-mail.
On the other side of the aisle, most Hudson Valley lawmakers have sought to legislate their way to a closed power station. Rep. John Hall, D-Dover Plains, has said Entergy's decision to seek relicensing "defies reason" because of a rash of recent problems at the plant.
And independent advocacy groups have stepped up their campaign to close the twin reactors, which sit on the Hudson River 35 miles north of Midtown Manhattan. On Monday, Riverkeeper, a Tarrytown-based environmental group, called on the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to reject Entergy's renewal application outright.
Public opinion has always been a player in the Indian Point debate. Fancy Web sites and corporate sponsorship — Entergy's support of Yankees baseball, for example — have saturated the regional media market before. But since Sept. 11, 2001, the PR battles have become more heated, and more costly, observers say.
According to The Center for Public Integrity, Entergy spent over $13.5 million on lobbying between 1998 and 2004. It is unclear how much money the multibillion dollar corporation has thrown at Indian Point advertising, but it's clear the company is not shy about spending to promote. In 2003, an Entergy-funded coalition of pro-Vermont Yankee supporters spent about $200,000 in advertisements, according to newspaper reports. Closer to home, Entergy spent an undisclosed amount the same year to help form the New York Affordable Reliable Electricity Alliance. That coalition of business and labor interests was founded to counter Indian Point critics.
David Lochbaum, a nuclear safety engineer at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said the current PR war is aimed squarely at the NRC license renewal process. "What's going on at Indian Point is likely to determine how many questions the NRC asks, how many additional things the company has to do or promise," he said.
Lochbaum isn't confident the anti-plant public relations blitz will be effective. The NRC has never rejected a plant renewal application. But NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said the high-profile of Indian Point is raising public awareness. And it's the public, ultimately, that could hold the key to Indian Point's future.

Nukes, coal create energy roadblock

Nukes, coal create energy roadblock
By YANCEY ROY ALBANY BUREAU Journal News
(Original publication: June 5, 2007)
ALBANY - State rules regarding power plants expired four years ago - and the issue has been deadlocked since.
Yesterday, rank-and-file Republicans and Democrats experienced first-hand why it's been so tough to find a middle ground.
The setting was a conference committee meant to hash out differences over a proposal to streamline energy regulations. But after easily agreeing to some basic goals, they hit a roadblock on whether to allow nuclear plants and every variety of coal plant to qualify for fast-track approval.
Senate Republicans insisted that the new law be "technology neutral." That is, any power source could qualify as long as it meets existing pollution standards.
Democrats who control the Assembly say they don't want to include nuclear power because the federal-approval process for such plants effectively supersedes state rules. They also want to strictly limit what type of coal plant qualifies.
Back and forth they went until they hit this point:
"What other topics do you want to discuss since we're not getting anywhere on coal or (energy) diversity?" asked Assembly Energy Committee Chairman Paul Tonko, D-Amsterdam, Montgomery County.
"Maybe it's best we call it a day," replied his counterpart, Sen. James Wright, R-Watertown, Jefferson County.
At issue is Article 10, a power-plant siting law that expired in 2003. Because of the gridlock, just a small amount of power supply has been added to the grid while demand has climbed. Gov. Eliot Spitzer has made Article 10 a key component of his energy strategy and of his plans he says will help the upstate economy. High energy costs frequently have been cited as reason the economy has lagged.
The governor also has called for allocating $295 million for "clean," renewable power projects - especially wind - and for reducing electricity consumption 15 percent by 2015.
Spitzer has put himself between environmental groups and energy groups on coal, by saying that one type of production process (gasification) meets the criteria for "clean coal" and, therefore, fast-track status. Power producers and Senate Republicans want a broader definition. Some environmental groups don't think any type of coal production should qualify.
"Shouldn't you incentivize the technologies that have the most benefits to the state?" said Jason Babbie of the New York Public Interest Research Group. "By opening the gates to any and all technologies, you don't know what you're going to get."

Riverkeeper Calls on NRC to Reject Entergy's Application for 20-Year Extension

Will NRC Do the Right Thing?

6-4-07 Riverkeeper Calls on NRC to Reject Entergy's Application for 20-Year Extension
FROM: RIVERKEEPERContact: Renee Cho, Riverkeeper914-478-4501 x 239 For Immediate Release 6-4-2007
RIVERKEEPER CALLS ON NRC TO REJECT ENTERGY’S APPLICATION FOR TWENTY-YEAR LICENSE EXTENSION OF INDIAN POINT***Entergy Application Ignores Annual Killing of Over 1 Billion Hudson River Fish***Entergy’s Environmental Report Ignores Critical Facts about Indian Point Radioactive Leaks(Tarrytown, NY) Today Riverkeeper formally called on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to reject Entergy Nuclear Northeast’s relicensing application for the two nuclear reactors at the Indian Point nuclear power facility located in Buchanan, New York. The application, submitted on April 30, 2007, is currently under review by the NRC. Federal regulations under the Atomic Energy Act require that the application be “complete and accurate in all material respects.” Riverkeeper staff attorneys have identified numerous inaccuracies and omissions in Entergy’s bid for twenty-year license extensions, including a failure to address impacts on the Hudson River fisheries and a deeply flawed analysis of the radioactive leak discovered in August 2005 that is contaminating the groundwater. “It’s quite apparent why a multi-billion dollar corporation would want to cover-up the tremendous impacts its operations have on the environment when seeking an additional twenty-years of solid profits from two polluting reactors,” stated Lisa Rainwater, Indian Point Campaign director. “However, no reason exists for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to accept an application fraught with errors and half-truths. Entergy’s failure to address Indian Point’s ongoing destruction of the Hudson River fisheries and a radioactive leak that is poisoning the groundwater renders the application incomplete. The application must be rejected. Period.” Under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the applicant is required to prepare an Environmental Report to address the impacts and any adverse effects on the environment, and the reasonable alternatives available. The applicant’s assessment of future environmental impacts must be objective, and include even “adverse information.” In the application, Entergy maintains that the continued use of once-through cooling systems for Indian Point will “ensure that entrainment [of Hudson River fish, eggs, and larvae] will remain small,” despite overwhelming evidence from Federal and State reports documenting the tremendous environmental impacts of this out-dated technology. In 2003 the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation issued a draft permit that recognized Entergy’s current method of withdrawing 2.5 billion gallons of Hudson River water per day was in violation of the Clean Water Act and stipulated that a closed-cycle cooling system would need to be installed, should the plant receive a twenty-year license extension, in order to mitigate an additional twenty years of fishkills. “Entergy essentially ignores that each year Indian Point causes the mortality of more than a billion fish,” noted Victor Tafur, Riverkeeper staff attorney. “They fail to evaluate current specific information prepared by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) regarding the facility’s impacts on aquatic resources. The NRC needs to take this into account during the relicensing process.” NEPA also requires that applicants address “New and Significant Information” in the Environmental Report. Since at least August 2005, radioactive leaks from spent fuel pools for all three Indian Point reactors have contributed to a massive contamination of the underlying groundwater. To-date neither the NRC nor Entergy has been able to conclusively determine the sources of the leaks, the longevity of the leaks, nor the full contamination of the site. Entergy’s analysis of the potential environmental impacts of these leaks in the application’s Environmental Report are unsupported by the facts and at odds with the current positions of both New York State and NRC Staff involved in the ongoing groundwater leak investigation. In addition, the Environmental Report fails to address potential contamination of Hudson River fish from strontium-90, one of the radioactive isotopes identified in samples taken at the plant and detected in four of twelve Hudson River fish in a preliminary analysis.Riverkeeper staff attorney Phillip Musegaas concluded, “Entergy’s license renewal application for Indian Point is a textbook example of cherry-picking facts and data to support Entergy’s astonishing assertion that the operation of Indian Point does not cause severe environmental impacts. Whoever drafted it conveniently forgot to include the most current data from New York State and the NRC regarding the impacts of once through cooling and the unresolved problems of Indian Point’s leaking spent fuel pools. The NRC must send this back to Entergy with a message: Stop wasting our time and give us an application that describes the true impacts of Indian Point on the environment.”Riverkeeper’s letter to the NRC can be viewed at: http://riverkeeper.org/dyn-content/documents/951466448464c9ba.pdfThe publicly available version of Entergy’s license renewal application, including the Environmental Report, can be found at http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applications/indian-point.html, last accessed May 30, 2007.

Indian Point siren testing runs until mid-June

Indian Point siren testing runs until mid-June
By ERIC TOBEYTHE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: June 5, 2007)
Indian Point will test emergency sirens until the middle of the month, part of an effort to install a new $15 million notification system for the nuclear plant.
The testing, which began yesterday and will continue until June 15, will be done on 20 of the 150 new sirens in the 10-mile evacuation zone around the plant that includes Westchester, Rockland, Putnam and Orange counties.
"The tests are for gathering data on the volume of individual sirens," said Jim Steets, a spokesman for Entergy Nuclear Northeast, which owns and operates Indian Point. "We want to verify that the sirens are working as designed."
The company is working to install the new system no later than Aug. 24, after missing a second deadline in April that cost Entergy $130,000 in federal fines.
Residents within hearing distance of each siren test will be notified of the full-volume soundings before by a recorded telephone message. No action by the public is required.
In the event of a real emergency, the sirens are used to alert residents to tune into the local radio or TV stations for more information. The new sound of the siren is a consistent, unwavering loud tone, according to Entergy.
Tests will be done generally at 9 a.m., noon or 3 p.m. There also might be more than one sounding of each siren.
For specific locations and dates of each test, log onto www.safesecurevital.com.

NRC schedules first Indian Point license renewal meeting

NRC schedules first Indian Point license renewal meeting

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has scheduled a public meeting to discuss the license renewal process for the Indian Point nuclear power plant on Wednesday, June 27, at Colonial Terrace in Cortlandt Manor, NY.
There will be two sessions, from 1:30 p.m. to 3 p.m. and from 7 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. NRC staff will be available for individual discussions prior to and during the meetings, from 1 p.m. to 8 p.m.
The NRC received an application from Entergy, dated April 23, for the renewal of the operating licenses for an additional 20 years for IPEC.
The purpose of the meeting is to maximize discussion with the public to ensure their issues and concerns may be presented, understood and considered by the NRC.
A second meeting, concerning environmental scoping, will be held at a later date.