Pilgrim Nuclear: "Fukushima Fix"...When do we say NO!

Residents seek new review of Pilgrim Nuclear

Say review is essential to prevent damage to the environment

Article | News | November 3, 2014 - 3:00pm | By Walter Brooks

Residents seek environmental review of Pilgrim Nuclear "Fukushima Fix"

According to a release from CapeCodBayWatch, a Massachusetts environmental organization, a group of twenty-two local South Shore and Cape Cod residents have asked the state Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs to initiate an environmental review of activities proposed by Entergy Nuclear Generation Co. (Entergy) at its Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station (Pilgrim) in Plymouth.

In a petition to Secretary Maeve Vallely Bartlett (shown on right) under the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA), the residents say that such a review "is essential to prevent or mitigate damage to the environment."

The group says that Entergy is seeking permission from the state to install an emergency cooling water system which would involve pumping seawater from Cape Cod Bay into the reactor facility if an emergency caused Pilgrim's cooling system to fail.

Raise specter of the Fukushima nuclear disaster

Meg Sheehan, an attorney who signed the petition says "After the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission said Pilgrim cannot operate safely during certain events such as high winds, snow and ice, extreme temperatures and seismic occurrences. Entergy has to install certain upgrades including an emergency cooling water system requiring a state permit. There has been no environmental study of the impacts of the permit and the cooling water system. The 'fail safe petition' provisions of the MEPA law give residents the right to seek such an environmental review and that's what we want."

Janet Azarovitz, a petitioner from Falmouth, added, "We are asking the state to step up to use its power to require an environmental study under MEPA. In an emergency event, Entergy's so-called 'fix' could discharge toxic pollution into our environment. The state has an obligation to assess the potential impact and explain how the project serves a proper public purpose and provides greater benefits than detriments to the public. I hope we can be assured that this is exactly what the state will do."

Public meeting November 18 at10 a.m. at Plymouth Town Hall

The CapeCodBayWatch's publicity release states that Entergy has applied to the state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) for a Chapter 91 Waterways license to do the work that is the subject of the residents' MEPA petition.

DEP will hold a public hearing on the Chapter 91 Waterways license application for the emergency cooling water system on November 18, 2014 at 10 a.m. at Plymouth Town Hall. The meeting is open to the public and all are invited to speak and address their concerns to the DEP.





http://www.capecodtoday.com/article/2014/11/03/27710-residents-seek-new-review-pilgrim-nuclear



This isn't about politics....but it always seems to be these days.

Solar Energy and Wind Energy are far cheaper than nuclear - don't ya love to see those Wind Turbines churning out power?

This should be simply the beginning of re-thinking our CLEAN ENERGY consumption.

When did a WIND TURBINE spew toxic radiation that jeopardized the health of millions?

When did a Solar Array cause cancer?

Nuclear energy no longer makes sense with the risks, increased cancer risks and the safety failures.

The paid shills will undoubtedly post subsequent comments...maybe they just slept late today.

• There were candidates who were outspoken and informed in their insistence that Pilgrim Nuclear had problems that jeopardized public safety that required addressing. 
• 
  Those candidates were not necessarily those who garnered to greatest support and votes.
  Pilgrim Nuclear is the same age and same design as Fukushima. 
• 
  The evacuation plan has always been inadequate. 
• 
  The nuclear waste is stored ON SITE and much else. 
• 
  It used to be believed that Nuclear was somehow clean....time to re-think! 
• 
  Nuclear Energy is 100% taxpayers subsidized, guaranteed and excluded from liability.
•  
  At what point do we, as just simple residents of surrounding communities question? 
• 
  When do we say 'Hmmm....how fast can I outrun a nuclear catastrophe?'