Posts
FERMI
Dedicated to stopping another nuclear reactor
Please scroll down to read more posts, including statements on the Combined Operators License Application, or COLA and News Posts
The Fermi page document is Microsoft Word format. It is from the NRC website with links and information about the Fermi 3 application/process.
The article Winsor v Fermi is notepad format.
To the Members of the Commission:
The Michigan Chapter of the Sierra Club, Beyond Nuclear, Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical Contamination, Citizens Resistance at Fermi 2, Coalition for a Nuclear-Free Great Lakes,Don't Waste Michigan, and Toledo Coalition for Safe Energy, along with several individual residents in the Monroe, Michigan area respectfully request that the the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission immediately suspend the current proceedings aimed and review and ultimately, approval of DTE Energy Company’s combined construction and operating license application (“COLA”) for Fermi 3, a proposed new nuclear power plant near Monroe, Michigan.
These public organizations and citizens make this request to suspend the COLA adjudication for Fermi 3 pending the commencement and completion of the design certification rulemaking proceeding for the proposed Economically Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (“ESBWR”) design on which DTE’s COLA depends. We ask that the Commission repudiate a recent policy statement that would unlawfully remove the COLA’s design-related contents from the scope of issues that may be challenged in the COLA adjudication and refer those issues to be resolved in a separate, parallel rulemaking proceeding to our knowledge has not been scheduled or commenced, the Policy Statement on the Conduct of New Reactor Licensing Proceedings, 72 Fed. Reg. 20,963 (April 17, 2008) (“2008 Policy Statement”). The 2008 Policy Statement– which is not enforceable law or regulation - should be ignored because it violates Section 189a of the Atomic Energy Act (“AEA”), as well as judicial precedents interpreting the AEA, and the NRC’s Part 52 regulations for the conduct of licensing proceedings on COLAs.Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. FPC, 506 F.2d 33, 38-39 (D.C. Cir. 1974) (when an agency applies a policy in a particular situation,“it must be prepared to support the policy just as if the policy statement had never been issued”).
The Commission should further reconsider and revoke a recent decision that affirms and applies the unlawful policy, Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc. (Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Units 2 and 3), CLI-08-15 (July 23, 2008) (“CLI-08-15”). The Sierra Club and other public organizations and individuals further suggest that the manner in which the NRC is poised to conduct the licensing proceeding would deprive these groups and individuals and the general public a fair and meaningful opportunity for a hearing on the Fermi COLA, in violation of the AEA, the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”)and the NRC’s own regulations. As a matter of law, the COLA is incapable of meeting the APA’s requirement t for an adequate hearing notice, because one of the chief “issues of . . . law” that must be included in the hearingnotice – the content of the ESBWR standard design certification rule –has not been established.
The legal circumstance here is that the application cannot be considered “complete” for purposes of satisfying the docketing standard in 10 C.F.R. § 2.101(a)(2) or § 2.104(b)’s requirement to provide notice of the factual issues subject to a hearing, because the underlying design is not even finished, let alone certified.
Without a fixed, certified ESBWR design, public commenters in the ongoing NEPA proceeding cannot meaningfully comment concerning operational prospects and associated environmental effects; accident scenarios and such effects; nor can they be afforded an understanding of the ongoing radiation emissions that come from all operating nuclear power plants. Furthermore, the public faces a March 9, 2009 deadline to raise trial contentions in the coming adjudication of the license. The absence of certainty about whether the ESBWR design will even be the ultimate reactor constructed by DTE (assuming that somehow nuclear is the preferred alternative against far safer and cheaper options) is a denial of due process to the public.
Consequently, any licensing efforts conducted by the NRC will be riddled with doubts and conditions which will, of course, heighten the growing perception that the fix is in and that this process is merely bread and circuses.
The regulatory scheme embodied in 10 CFR Part 52 regulatory scheme leaves the Commission only two choices with respect to the conduct of a licensing proceeding for the proposed Fermi 3: either to hold an adjudication on the entire COLA, including the ESBWR design certification application that is incorporated by reference into the COLA; or to complete the ESBWR design certificationrulemaking before holding an adjudicatory hearing on the Fermi 3 COLA. The Part 52 regulations do not give the NRC the option of removing the COLA’s design-related contents from the scope of the adjudication on the COLA and referring them to a separate rulemaking for resolution.
The NRC has apparently committed to conduct a rulemaking on the ESBWR standard design certification application. The Sierra Club and other public groups and individuals respectfully suggest that the Commission must complete the ESBWR design certification rulemaking before commencing the Fermi 3 COLA adjudication and therefore, they request to suspend all further steps toward that adjudication immediately, pending completion of the ESBWR design certification rulemaking.
Thank you.
Very truly yours,
Terry J. Lodge
Article published at MonroeNews.com on Jan 15, 2009
Fermi 3 might face legal challenges
DTE Energy's progress toward construction of a new nuclear power plant might be sidetracked by legal challenges to both the project and the process.
Critics argue that hearings held Wednesday were timed to minimize public participation, that the plans for the reactor are shrouded in secrecy, and the public was being asked unfairly to comment on a reactor design that doesn't yet exist.
Monroe resident Michael Keegan of Don't Waste Michigan, said the first notice of Wednesday's hearings were issued on Christmas Eve and scheduled to be held "in the heart of a Michigan winter."
He suggested that because of the timing of the notices, the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission should extend the deadline for accepting comments on the scope of the planned federal environmental review of the proposal for 90 days and hold another hearing in the spring when the weather would be better.
The agency would consider suggestions to extend the deadline, said Prema Chandrathil, an NRC spokeswoman.
Mr. Keegan also said the procedure is premature because the NRC has not approved the design of the reactor that DTE said it intends to order. The company is looking at a GE-Hitachi Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor.
Mr. Keegan and others say that design has been abandoned by several other utilities and isn't yet certified by federal officials.
"We're being asked to make comment on a reactor design which does not exist," Mr. Keegan said. "This whole process is invalid because we don't have a valid reactor design.
But federal officials said DTE's application to build a plant wouldn't be approved before a reactor design is certified by the agency.
Mr. Keegan contended the utility was engaging in a "bait and switch. They will be aborting this design and choosing another," he said.
Terry Lodge, an attorney with the Toledo Coalition for Safe Energy, said he will prepare a legal challenge to the plant construction later this spring and become a party to the federal licensing process, representing a coalition of environmental groups.
He also contends essential documents about Fermi 3 are unavailable because they are considered classified or sensitive. DTE had petitioned the NRC to make available some material regarding the plant only on a need-to-know basis because of the sensitive nature of the data.
Citizens interested in accessing it have to make a compelling case for disclosure, pay a $191 fee and vow not to reveal it to third parties.
Mr. Keegan called that "a blatant obstruction of democracy by trying to conceal documents from the public."
Article published at MonroeNews.com on Jan 15, 2009
Debate begins on new nuclear plant proposal
A new nuclear power plant built near Newport was alternately described as a boon to the economy or a curse on the community during back-to-back federal hearings Wednesday in Monroe.
Backers said the DTE Energy project would provide jobs, needed tax base and clean energy for the future. Critics said it would burden electric customers and pose a threat to health, safety and the environment.
About 150 people attended two three-hour sessions held by the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission at Monroe County Community College. The purpose of the meetings was to help determine the issues federal regulators should consider in assessing the environmental impact of such a plant.
DTE has applied for a construction and operation license for a 1,500-megawatt Fermi 3 reactor to be built just southwest of its operating Fermi 2 nuclear plant on the shores of Lake Erie. The project, which might cost as much as $10 billion, could start operating by 2020.
But Ron May, a DTE senior vice president, emphasized that the utility isn't committed to the project yet.
"We haven't decided to build a nuclear power plant," he said. "We're in the game, but we haven't committed yet to build."
He said the utility might not need the power the plant would generate for another 15 or 20 years and its application for a license was timed to make it eligible for federal tax incentives if it moved ahead with the project.
Monroe County Commissioner Floreine Mentel, who represents Frenchtown Township where the plant would be built, commended the utility for environmental stewardship and said the plant would mean "an influx of good-paying jobs." Projections are that 2,400 temporary construction jobs would be generated and 400 to 700 permanent staff jobs.
"This is a significant investment that would stabilize the local tax base, which has been battered by falling home prices and industrial losses," she said.
But Nancy Seubert, coordinator of the Justice, Peace and Sustainability office of the Monroe-based Sisters, Servants of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, said she was concerned about the larger financial risks such a plant would pose.
Costs include funding for disposal of nuclear waste, insuring against accidents and eventual decommissioning of the plant.
"These added costs are all shouldered by taxpayers," she said.
Kay Cumbow of Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical Contamination said the planning and review of the project "is being done way too hastily." She also said the investment in the plant would be better spent on developing wind, solar or other alternative power sources. And she noted that nuclear plants are potential terrorism targets.
"No terrorist is going to go after a wind turbine," she said.
Connie Carroll, director of the United Way of Monroe County, lauded DTE for charitable contributions and community involvement. "Construction of a Fermi 3 would most definitely enrich the economic environment of Monroe County," she said.
Environmental issues were on the mind of Sandy Bihn, Lake Erie waterkeeper, who said the NRC should consider the effects of warm water discharges from such a plant on the ecology of Maumee Bay, fish deaths, phosphorus pollution and algae growth. She also said a surface water analysis should encompass Lake Erie's western basin, not merely the area around Monroe.
Dr. Donald Spencer, superintendent of the Monroe County Intermediate School District, said DTE's Fermi 2 plant is a model for efficient and safe operation and the company and its employees "make Monroe County a better place to live."
"Our economy also needs a shot in the arm that a construction project of this magnitude would supply to the region," he said.
The problem of nuclear waste disposal was a concern underscored by Kevin Kamps of Beyond Nuclear, an industry watchdog group. Mr. Kamps gave a clinic on the dilemma of nuclear waste disposal.
"The only real solution is to stop generating it," he said. "Fermi 3 should be stopped because of the dangerous radioactive wastes it would generate."
But Tracy Oberleiter, chairman of the Monroe County Economic Development Corp., said the group was excited to hear of the potential plans.
"This is a rare and unique opportunity that other communities could only dream about," he said.
His remarks were echoed by William Morris, president of the Monroe County Industrial Development Corp., who cited the erosion of jobs and tax base in the area.
"Due to conditions such as these, many of our young people have to leave home to start out their careers in other areas of the country that are enjoying more robust economies," he said. "Our brightest and most earnest workers may well become Monroe County's largest export."
But Monroe resident Frank Mantei said nuclear power industry jobs are much more costly per job than jobs generated by investment in alternative energy, "which would give us the biggest bang for the buck."
Plant construction would create jobs, he conceded, "but who would pay for these very expensive jobs - the electrical customers of DTE through higher electric rates." He said the plant would be "a real economic boondoggle."
Yet Ron Sweat, business manager of Plumbers & Pipefitters Local 671 and former Fermi 2 worker, said nuclear jobs enriched the community. He said alternative energy is an option, but "the sun isn't always shining here in Michigan and the wind isn't always blowing."
"I think it would be a winning situation for the community to build this next unit," he said.
Sister Joan Mumaw, IHM vice president, said the NRC should consider the effect of routine radiation releases from the plant on at-risk populations such as pregnant women, children and the elderly. That's one of the factors that concerns the IHM, which has 180 elderly residents living within 10 miles of the proposed site.
NRC officials said a summary of the comments with a response to pertinent issues would be ready by July. They will issue a draft of their environmental impact statement and hold a hearing on it next year and expect to issue a final environmental impact statement in 2011.
Written comments on the scope of the environmental review may be submitted by mail or e-mail no later than Feb. 9. Mailed comments should be sent to Chief, Rulemaking, Directives and Editing Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, Mailstop TWB-05-B01M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 or e-mailed to Fermi3.coleis@nrc.gov.
The utility[Apostrophe]s own environmental report on the proposed plant is on file at the Monroe County Library System's Ellis Reference & Information Center, 3700 S. Custer Rd.
No need to build new U.S. coal or nuclear plants -- FERC chairman
By NOELLE STRAUB AND PETER BEHR, Greenwire [http://www.greenwire.com]
No new nuclear or coal plants may ever be needed in the United States,
the chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission said today.
"We may not need any, ever," Jon Wellinghoff told reporters at a U.S.
Energy Association forum.
Building nuclear plants is cost-prohibitive, he said, adding that the
last price he saw was more than $7,000 a kilowatt -- more expensive than
solar energy. "Until costs get to some reasonable cost, I don't think
anybody's going to [talk] that seriously," he said. "Coal plants are
sort of in the same boat, they're not quite as expensive."
There's enough renewable energy to meet energy demand, Wellinghoff said.
"There's 500 to 700 gigawatts of developable wind throughout the
Midwest, all the way to Texas. There's probably another 200 to 300
gigawatts in Montana and Wyoming that can go West."
He also cited tremendous solar power in the Southwest and hydrokinetic
and biomass energy, and said the United States can reduce energy usage
by 50 percent. "You combine all those things together ... I think we
have great resources in this country, and we just need to start using
them," he said.
But planning for modifying the grid to integrate renewables must take
place in the next three to five years, he said.
"If we don't do that, then we miss the boat,"Wellinghoff said. "That
planning has to take place so you don't strand a lot of assets, a lot of
supply assets."
/Senior reporter Ben German contributed./
Fermi 3 plans face legal fight
By Dalson Chen, The Windsor Star
March 12, 2009
Michigan Messenger: Fermi 3 opposition takes legal action
Go to Webpage: http://michiganmessenger.com/category/energy to gain access to the page with the entire article and view comments and/or to make comments.
High Level Radioactive Waste at Fermi 2
Danger to Life and Civil Liberties
"Site Specific" contentions were filed Monday regarding the "temporary" storage of high level nuclear waste at Fermi 2. Interveners reply (to DTE / NRC motion to dismiss) of June 8th is attached to this Media Release.
Monroe Michigan -- This week environmental and energy watchdog organization Beyond Nuclear and Membership filed Site Specific Interventions to protect the Great Lakes from High Level Radioactive Waste at the Fermi Complex.
Interveners contend:
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has violated the Administrative Procedures Act through improper notification of the public with regards to modifications of the Fermi 2 license as it pertains to storage of high level nuclear waste on the shores of Lake Erie. Site Specific concerns have been raised by the Interveners which provide an "Opportunity for Hearing", but the public was not properly notified.
"The level of shenanigans that Detroit Edison and the Regulator will go to in order to lock the public out of any meaningful discourse is appalling" stated Monroe resident Michael Keegan.
Keegan elaborated that "Lake Erie is the drinking water supply for millions downstream in the US and Canada and is being placed in jeopardy. The shallow western basin of Lake Erie is the most biologically productive and fragile part of the Great Lakes. But because of myopic planning by the Detroit Edison Company (DTE), driven by greed, this is precisely where this high-level radioactive waste would be stored."
Interveners contend that both Detroit Edison Company (DTE)and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) must consider alternatives to the current Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation general license at Fermi 2. These alternatives must address needed security upgrades and their ramifications, as well as societal costs, including civil liberties. Interveners contend that a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)encompassing the safety, security, and environmental impacts of the Fermi 2 dry cask storage installation should be required. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations allow for up to 140 yeas of on site storage to be considered "temporary". (Initial 20 year license + 5 renewals of 20 years + 20 year cool off period = 140 years)
Kevin Kamps, nuclear waste specialist for Beyond Nuclear stated "The siting of one of the most lethal toxins known to humankind on the shores of Lake Erie for up to 140 years warrants a full Environmental Impact Statement, not to do so constitutes criminal negligence and reckless endangerment, but that is precisely what is being rubber-stamped."
Interveners contend that hardened on-site storage should be required as an interim measure to adequately protect public health, safety, and security, as well as the environment. Because of the shared border and waterways with Canada heighten potential exists of a Cigarette or other boat to traverse these waters and initiate a terrorist action. Thus, this high level nuclear waste must be fortified and bunkered.
Interveners contend that a wet well, or waste storage, transfer, and handling pool, should be required at ground level on the site, in order to allow for future re-packaging of waste storage containers as their integrity breaks down over time, as well as to serve as an emergency storage and handling location in the event of problems with dry storage casks. The "spent" nuclear fuel pool at Fermi is on the 5th floor. Once the nuclear waste is brought to ground level, there is no going back up if there is a breach of a Dry Cask basket / canister, thus it is necessary to have a wet well at ground level.
Regarding structural integrity breakdowns, Interveners demand that an independent quality assurance inspection on the design and manufacture of Holtec International high-level radioactive waste storage/transport containers be required before their use at Fermi.
DTE's Fermi 3 Review Schedule.
This is a PDF file.
DTE is pushing it!
Citizen group loses ruling on opposition to waste plan
by Charles Slat , last modified September 03. 2009 11:02AM
A citizens' group said it will continue opposing plans to store radioactive fuel in casks on the grounds of DTE's Fermi 2 nuclear power plant, despite a federal panel's ruling that they failed to show how they could be harmed if such a storage facility was created.
Beyond Nuclear, a Maryland group whose members include several Monroe County residents who live near the plant, is seeking better security and safety measures for the planned outside storage facility, citing the potential harm caused by cask failure or terrorist attacks.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's three-member Atomic Safety Licensing Board said that although Beyond Nuclear members argued that the facility "could adversely affect my health and safety and the integrity of the environment in which I live," they lacked "legal standing" in the matter because they didn't adequately substantiate their allegations of potential injury they might suffer from such a storage facility at Fermi 2. The federal officials also suggested that creating the cask storage system, in fact, would make fuel storage safer at the plant.
"It's mind-boggling that the NRC licensing board ruled we lack standing, when several of our interveners live within just six to eight miles of the proposed high-level radioactive waste storage facility," said Michael Keegan of Monroe, a Beyond Nuclear member.
Construction already has started on the base of the outside storage area for tons of highly radioactive used fuel from the Fermi 2 reactor. The company is expected to take delivery later this year of the first of 12 casks. It plans to begin moving fuel from a spent-fuel storage pool inside the reactor building to the casks sometime in 2010.
DTE said it will invest about $62.5 million in a system of 20-foot-tall casks that will ease crowding in the storage pool alongside the Fermi reactor. Nuclear plants around the country have been storing their highly radioactive used nuclear fuel in casks as space in the reactor storage pools has dwindled and progress toward developing a single, centralized federal storage facility has stalled.
Beyond Nuclear asserts that the casks could be vulnerable to terrorists using anti-tank weaponry and that the configuration of the Fermi 2 plant should require a back-up fuel storage pool be developed next to the cask storage area because it would be difficult to put spent fuel back into the plant if there was an outside accident or breach because the fuel pool storage is on the fifth floor of the Fermi 2 reactor building. It also argued that the casks should be inside a hardened storage facility and not out in the open.
The ASLB said the only option it would have would be to withdraw the NRC order allowing the creation of the facility. "But the Commission's order is intended to reduce the possibility of a terrorist attack at the Fermi site, thus, rescinding the order will not likely redress petitioners' injuries," the ASLB said. "In fact, it will more likely aggravate those injuries, or at least maintain the status quo. Because petitioners fail to explain why they will be better off in the absence of the Commission's order, petitioners have failed to demonstrate that a hearing will redress their injury."
Terry Lodge, a Toledo attorney representing Beyond Nuclear, said there are unanswered questions about the cask storage facility being planned. "What we're saying is that the NRC has never made any order except this one regarding the decision to move to dry cask storage by DTE," he said. "There's not really a formal opportunity to demand a full searching kind of inquest into what they intend to do in terms of security arrangements. I don't think the NRC's mere decision to require a change in license at Fermi to to incorporate better technology equates to a security improvement.
They've made no showing that there will be an improvement."
By Angie Favot
FRENCHTOWN TWP. — Residents and people working within a 10-mile radius of DTE Energy’s Fermi 2 nuclear power plant are being offered the option to take a pill during a nuclear emergency that blocks radioactive material from entering their thyroid gland.
On Oct. 1, the state made a free supply of potassium iodide available.
The pill is meant to be taken during a “general emergency,” the most serious type of power plant emergency, which must be declared by the plant and emergency officials.
Downriver communities in a 10-mile radius include Flat Rock, Rockwood, Brownstown Township, Woodhaven and Trenton.
Martha Stanbury, state Division of Environmental Health section manager, said there has never been a “general emergency” declared in the United States, but in the event of an accident at a nuclear power plant, radioactive iodine could be released into the air.
That type of radiation can be stored in the thyroid gland, which can cause thyroid cancer or other thyroid problems over time. According to the state Department of Community Health’s Web site, children are most at risk of thyroid injury from exposure to radioactive iodine.
The potassium iodide pill fills the thyroid gland with nonradioactive iodine, which blocks the possibility of radioactive iodine filling it during an emergency. The pill lasts 24 hours.
The thyroid gland manages heart rate, blood pressure, temperature and other essential body functions. Potassium iodide does not, however, protect the whole body from radioactive material, just the thyroid gland.
Stanbury said west Michigan residents near Palisades Nuclear Power Station and Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant: Unit 1 are receiving the vouchers, too.
The Department of Community Health used a direct mail service, and that notification of the pills being available went to every address within that 10-mile circumference, including residents, businesses and schools. Stanbury said 85,000 mailings were sent statewide. The mailing included a fact sheet and the voucher so people can choose if they want to take the pill or not.
Anyone who wants the pills can turn in the voucher to the Meijer pharmacies at 22600 Allen Road, Woodhaven, or 1700 Telegraph Road, Monroe.
Stanbury said the mailings went out at the end of September.
“We know the pharmacies have been busy, but they’re not overwhelmed,” she said.
In December 2001, the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission offered potassium iodide at no cost to 33 states for residents living within 10 miles of nuclear power plants. Stanbury said Michigan is the 23rd state to accept the offer.
She said state officials debated the option at length because they were concerned about the impact the pill would have against plans that have existed for 30 years. For example, it might interfere with an evacuation plan.
“We felt in the end, after hundreds of hours of discussion and so forth, that we needed to move ahead and accept the offer with a notion that this is simply a supplemental effort, and at the public’s own decision if they want to put it in their emergency kit,” she said.
Stanbury said the pills come in boxes of 20, and each pill is 65 milligrams. An adult dosage is two pills, and children’s dosages vary based on age and weight. Anyone presenting a voucher will get a minimum of one box.
DTE Energy spokesman John Austerberry said the project is a state initiative, but “we concur with their decision to make them available.”
For questions on potassium iodide, visit www.michigan.gov/ki or send an e-mail to mdch-ki@michigan.gov.
Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of thenewsherald.com.
Better yet wrote on Nov 3, 2009 7:54 PM:
" Why not just a gun and a bullet? "
Really wrote on Nov 3, 2009 8:08 PM:
" I live in Trenton, have relatives that live in Woodhaven, neither I, nor they, or any of my neighbors have received any letters to date with a voucher for this to date??!! "
So all those in Japan wrote on Nov 3, 2009 9:58 PM:
" all they had to do was take a pill and they wouldn't have died? "
D. Kramer wrote on Nov 4, 2009 8:42 AM:
" We live in Gibraltar which is 9 miles from Fermi and we never received a mailing or voucher. "
Trentonite wrote on Nov 4, 2009 9:06 AM:
" We live in Trenton... not heard nor received a thing about this. "
Woodhaven resident wrote on Nov 4, 2009 9:14 AM:
" Never received a mailing. Maybe I live within 11 miles of the nuclear plant, so I must be safe. Not. "
Another Woodhaven Resident wrote on Nov 4, 2009 10:09 AM:
" I live in Woodhaven, at the very south end, and we did not receive any vouchers or information either? "
becareful wrote on Nov 4, 2009 10:58 AM:
" what if it's a cyanide capsule? "
KB wrote on Nov 4, 2009 12:04 PM:
" I live in Flat Rock and i got the mailing the end of September.... it looks like advertisement mail, just a 2 pg item folded in half and says resident on it.....i almost threw it away until i saw Michigan Department of Community Health on it. "
Concerned wrote on Nov 4, 2009 12:10 PM:
" I contacted the school about it after i received mine and they knew nothing about it, the homes get the mailings and the schools didn't? Schools are supposed to have emergency planning set for something like this and the city where my children go to school has 3 busses for 5 schools. how are they going to get all those children out of the area with only 3 busses????? 3 elementary schools one middle school and one high school, i have lived in this area for a long time and all of a sudden its important enough to have these pills? are they expecting something and not telling us? i have way too many questions about all this, time to buy some for sale signs...... "
Ha Ha wrote on Nov 4, 2009 2:06 PM:
" So you take the pill and your entire body gets irradiated and all the people within 10 miles will be dead and the fallout area will be much greater with people having life altering health problems with lasting detriment to survivors and their offspring for generations, even of our Canadian brothers... but the thyroid glands will be safe of the people in the immediate dead zone?!?! What a waste of postage, pills, tax dollars, "hundreds of hours of (legislators) discussion and so forth." I suppose tens of decades later when we start repopulating the area after an "event" that there will be a article written about the problem cleaning up all the surprisingly intact thyroid glands in the middle of dust piles that were once happy residents. I don't think anyone needs to worry about getting the "free pills." The nuclear meltdown and hydrogen explosion in 1986 at Chernobyl produced a radioactive cloud that floated not only over the modern states of Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and Moldova, but also Turkish Thrace, the Southern coast of the Black Sea, Macedonia, Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Greece, Romania, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Finland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Austria, Hungary, the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic, The Netherlands, Belgium, Slovenia, Poland, Switzerland, Germany, Luxembourg, Italy, Ireland, France, the United Kingdom and the Isle of Man. The news of the event was broken by a Swedish Nuclear plant 36 hours later who couldn't figure out why radioactive particles were on their employees clothing when there was no leak at their plant. Nuclear accidents do happen. One happened at Fermi 1 in 1966 and public was not immediately notified. I talked to a resident who lived close enough to hear the alarms. check this: http://a4nr.org/library/failures/nukeAccidents "
Beabeau wrote on Nov 4, 2009 3:43 PM:
" I live in Rockwood and I sure don't recall getting a notice. I need it. If something happens then I make it and others don't? No more lines at Applebee's!! Give me the pill "
