“BUCHANAN — Indian Point faced more hurdles on its way to extending its operating license than any other nuclear plant in the nation before the Fukushima meltdown — now the course ahead appears even tougher.

“The longer the plant in Japan keeps spewing radiation, the worse it is for the nuclear industry,” said Phillip Musegaas, a policy analyst for the environmental group Riverkeeper. “If I were on the other side, I would say we have to work very hard to get this off the news cycle and get back to business as usual.”

The landscape for relicensing nuclear plants for an additional 20 years of operation was a pretty friendly environment prior to March 11, when the worst recorded earthquake in Japan’s history and a huge followup tsunami knocked out the Fukushima reactors.

Subsequent fires sent radioactive fallout soaring into the atmosphere and across the Pacific Ocean as far as the United States.

Until Fukushima, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s record when it came to relicensing had been a perfect 63 and 0 — none of the atom plants that applied had been turned down.

Now that it’s Indian Point’s turn — regardless of events in Japan — officials from the plant’s owner, Entergy Nuclear, don’t believe the relicensing review should change four years into the process.

Entergy wants to extend the plant’s right to create electricity through 2035 rather than see its daily $2 million production cut off by the end of 2015.

“With the focus appropriately on aging management, there should be no reason that what we’re witnessing in Japan should have any impact on relicensing,” said Indian Point spokesman Jim Steets. “That doesn’t mean it shouldn’t have any regulatory impact.”

Steets said all the issues dominating the televised reports from Fukushima — including spent fuel pools overheating and releasing radiation, evacuations and earthquake risk — are part of ongoing regulations and plants could shut down in a day if regulators felt one wasn’t safe.

NRC officials have long said they don’t look at those issues during a relicensing review because those factors are part of day-to-day operations.

“There is no active discussion regarding changing our regulations on license renewal. They were developed over many years,” said NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan. “Dozens of plants have gone through it, and we believe it focuses on aspects of plant operation that are most important: environmental issues and managing aging.”

Indian Point already has plenty on its relicensing plate, including:

  • more official arguments against relicensing than any other U.S. plant.

  • New York state opposing the extension, the only state in 50 to do so.

  • a water-use permit from the state that may require the construction of new cooling technology costing up to $1 billion.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo has called for a safety review of Indian Point after the Japan earthquake and tsunami.

Eric Schneiderman, Cuomo’s successor as state attorney general, has petitioned the NRC to consider potential earthquake damage before renewing the operating licenses for the local plant as well as the nation’s 102 other commercial reactors.

“The safety review of Indian Point should be rigorous, and if there’s new information that comes along, such as seismic concerns, this would be an appropriate occasion to factor those in,” John Sipos, the assistant attorney general who has been working on Indian Point issues for nearly five years. “This site was selected back in 1955 by the federal government and (former owner) Con Edison, before there were many siting regulations at all, seismic-wise or population-wise.”

Sipos said there is little chance the site would have been approved today.

“It is important for real-world facts, as they take place, to be factored in,” Sipos said.

With the Fukushima crisis fresh in people’s minds, opponents such as Riverkeeper are getting phone calls from former activists energized with new concern and organizing anti-plant meetings in New York City.

“The people who have been concerned about Indian Point had kind of dropped off,” Musegaas said.

“All of a sudden there’s a swarm of activity. And there’s a lot of interest from our members who weren’t so concerned about the plant before,” Musegaas said.

He said a recent meeting in Manhattan drew 40 to 50 residents, many concerned about being included in an evacuation for a 50-mile radius of the plant.

Steets said the danger concerns were overblown and would abate as the industry is able to show it is prepared for natural disasters.

NRC officials have long said they don’t look at those issues during a relicensing review because those factors are part of day-to-day operations.

“There is no active discussion regarding changing our regulations on license renewal. They were developed over many years,” said NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan. “Dozens of plants have gone through it, and we believe it focuses on aspects of plant operation that are most important: environmental issues and managing aging.”

Indian Point already has plenty on its relicensing plate, including:

  • more official arguments against relicensing than any other U.S. plant.

  • New York state opposing the extension, the only state in 50 to do so.

  • a water-use permit from the state that may require the construction of new cooling technology costing up to $1 billion.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo has called for a safety review of Indian Point after the Japan earthquake and tsunami.

Eric Schneiderman, Cuomo’s successor as state attorney general, has petitioned the NRC to consider potential earthquake damage before renewing the operating licenses for the local plant as well as the nation’s 102 other commercial reactors.

“The safety review of Indian Point should be rigorous, and if there’s new information that comes along, such as seismic concerns, this would be an appropriate occasion to factor those in,” John Sipos, the assistant attorney general who has been working on Indian Point issues for nearly five years. “This site was selected back in 1955 by the federal government and (former owner) Con Edison, before there were many siting regulations at all, seismic-wise or population-wise.”

Sipos said there is little chance the site would have been approved today.

“It is important for real-world facts, as they take place, to be factored in,” Sipos said.

With the Fukushima crisis fresh in people’s minds, opponents such as Riverkeeper are getting phone calls from former activists energized with new concern and organizing anti-plant meetings in New York City.

“The people who have been concerned about Indian Point had kind of dropped off,” Musegaas said.

“All of a sudden there’s a swarm of activity. And there’s a lot of interest from our members who weren’t so concerned about the plant before,” Musegaas said.

He said a recent meeting in Manhattan drew 40 to 50 residents, many concerned about being included in an evacuation for a 50-mile radius of the plant.

Steets said the danger concerns were overblown and would abate as the industry is able to show it is prepared for natural disasters.”

To view the complete article, search the archives at the link below:

http://www.lohud.com/