Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Environment & Energy
In reply to the discussion: Nuclear Reactor Pool Fire/Huge Risks in U.S. According to Unpublicized NRC Study [View all]kristopher
(29,798 posts)12. The filing to the NRC (the PDF) asks them to make changes in how they license reactors
Since Fukushima it has become clear that storing a lot of spent fuel in those on-site pools can be dangerous. Believe it or not, the NRC never considered that as a factor in whether to license or relicense a plant.
request the NRC to consider, in all pending and future reactor licensing and re-licensing decisions, new and significant information bearing on the environmental impacts of high-density pool storage in reactor pools and alternatives for avoiding or mitigating those impacts.
They say this "new and significant information" was part of the NRC's study of what happened at Fukushima and that it has never been considered in licensing before. They can know this because all of the documents involve are matters of public record.
The NRC Staff generated this new and significant information during its post-Fukushima proceeding to consider whether it should order operating reactor licensees to expedite the transfer of spent fuel from high-density pool storage to dry storage.
No previous Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for initial reactor licensing, Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) for re-licensing of operating reactors, or Environmental Assessment (EA) for certification of standardized reactor designs has considered this information.
No previous Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for initial reactor licensing, Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) for re-licensing of operating reactors, or Environmental Assessment (EA) for certification of standardized reactor designs has considered this information.
The information they say is legally required to be considered consists of the items I posted in the OP.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
67 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Nuclear Reactor Pool Fire/Huge Risks in U.S. According to Unpublicized NRC Study [View all]
kristopher
Feb 2014
OP
Yes, they love to hide behind the difficulty in tracking nuclear related cancer related fatalities
kristopher
Feb 2014
#14
A consortium of nuclear companies that self insure doesn't really qualify as "commercial insurer"...
kristopher
Feb 2014
#22
That is exactly what the major accident coverage is - and they don't pay "premiums"
kristopher
Feb 2014
#24
You don't change the rotational speed of an AC generator to regulate the voltage output
madokie
Feb 2014
#53
The filing to the NRC (the PDF) asks them to make changes in how they license reactors
kristopher
Feb 2014
#12