Submitted by Don Ritherspoon, Dec 4, 2007 12:21

Cuomo & Spitzer (or antinuclear members of their staff) have demanded NRC consider earthquakes, terrorism, and population density, and evacuation, in deciding whether to continue IPEC's service to the region.

1)

Cuomo & Spitzer's staff, blindered by getting all their information third hand, obviously are unaware of the huge technical investment in earthquake mitigation already pre-deployed at IPEC. Each and every physically constructed item was calculated seismically, and overbuilt to withstand both the earthquake primary waves, but also its amplified reflections, based on height and position. One never sees a simple water pipe at IPEC. Instead one sees a pipe within a massive array of concrete-embedded stanchions, each one possessing the correct safety margin, with all the pertinent calculations kept in the engineering database. The inservice inspection regime looks these items over periodically, and orders repairs or upgrades when needed.This entire regime is in the public domain, available for Cuomo/Spitzer perusal, but instead of knowing of its existence, the two "great men" get led by the nose into a factual blunder---assuming none of it had been taken into consideration. This is typical of the level of error in the Cuomo filing. NRC need not re-consider earthquakes.... rather, it constantly considers earthquakes, and thus need not include it in license renewal. Cuomo/Spitzer's reference to Kashiwazaki plant in Japan only reinforces what I write here. Kashiwazaki suffered no significant damage, even though many civilian buildings collapsed completely. Some barrels of radioactive waste stored out of doors, spilled. IPEC has no such barrels, so such a spill could not occur. The mention of Kashiwazaki belies a public relations mind set, where simply mentioning a news story, is thought to somehow be enough to govern the State of New York. Unfortunately, it is not.

2)

NRC has considered terrorism, and has hardened all 104 nuclear plants since 9/11/2001. NRC has not seen fit to share its exact preparations with the public for obvious reasons. Cuomo/Spitzer's antinuke staff intentionally and maliciously misconstrues this reticence, and takes it upon themselves to dictate whatever ad-hoc preparations they have been handed from letters in the protest community, or tutored in by groups wanting IPEC closed. Because the protest groups have never defended a plant, have never run a security operation, and are purposely ignoring credible reassurances, they are prone to fanciful solutions to vague made-up problems, all of them simple straw men , set out to be knocked down, with the intent not of securing anything, but rather of closing the plant. I would tend to mistrust this kind of advice.

As for the airplane scenario..... because Rory Kennedy made a movie, is insufficient reason to povertize our region, and live underground. EPRI hired 4 widely respected civil engineering firms to scientifically calculate the airplane-on-dome impact. Without revealing particulars, the test says the dome survives, and the plane vaporizes. Do we credit Rory, or EPRI? Politically, it is our individuual choice, of course. Practically, I tend towards EPRI. Rory is just an artist, and had no factual basis for drawing her fear cartoon as she did.

3)

The consideration of population density is one that definitely trashes the Cuomo/Spitzer position, if taken seriously. The amount of people who would be impeded in their commutes, left without lights, forced into blackouts, made unemployed, left without heat, or without first responder protection, if Indian Point were removed from the local grid is much too large for Cuomo/Spitzer's myopic planners to ignore.

But ignore them they have.

In the irresponsible world of protest, that is allowable, if not quite realistic. However, when taking a protest position, and lifting it up to be a governmental policy, all the missing considerations must be put back in the equation, or else the official holders of the position will be criminally liable for whatever harm they induce by not governing for everyone.

This is the case we see with the shallow, erronious, single-sided position taken by Cuomo's staff. As far as population density.... please Mr. Attorney General, please Mr. Governor, consider the poor who will be left to fend with candles and kerosene heaters.... some of them burning down their homes (as we have seen recently). Consider the once-middle class, struggling with exploding tax rates, exploding electricity rates, and no wealth to fall back upon , as you have. Are we to be catapulted back into defacto lower-class poverty, because you failed to consider us? Us, the dense population you claim to want to help? Well then, help us. Abandon this one-sided protest philosophy and realize we need a government for all of us, and our infrastructure intact, or else you will create a small third world country out of New York State by your politically motivated mistakes. Doing it consciously, would be an unforgiveable sin.

4)

Evacuate?

There never has been a need to evacuate anyone from the vicinity of an American nuclear plant.

Will there never be a reason to evacuate? Most likely, no.

Dr. Herschel Spector, a top expert in evac planning, states that the area of concern, even in the worst credible case, would be an area of two miles. The two mile circle around Indian Point can quite easily be evacuated, even by walking, within an hour or two...Any residents further out, will never ever be reached by anything from the plant, even with the dome magically removed.

So where have we gotten the "50 mile circle of death" or whatever it is called? That bogus scenario is a product of the "Close Indian Point" propaganda machine. If you accept the "50 mile circle of death", and believe it, then Indian Point may seem to be a danger. The volcano Krakatoa devastated a 200 mile area. Why not believe in a 200 mile circle of death?

But let us pose a question. Would it not be better to seek a way to both be safe, and to retain your green carbon-free infrastructure? Herschel Spector tells us everyone outside two miles can forget about Indian Point. The United States EPA advises even those inside the 2 mile circle TO SIMPLY GO INDOORS. If protection is attained by simply going indoors, what is Cuomo/Spitzer's brief based upon?

Answer: It is based upon the exaggerations of protest propaganda.

Question: Ought the exaggerated positions of protest politics be used to run an entire state?

Answer: Only with the greatest trepidation.

Summary:

The consideration of evacuation has been skewed by vast overkill. No evac will ever be required, and then only a 2 mile evac. EPA advises going indoors (sheltering in place). Yes, the area's roads need much improvement, No, they will never endanger anyone vis-a-vis an event at Indian Point.

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.