By GREGORY N.HEIRES
Federal hearings on the relicensing of the Indian Point nuclear power plant have renewed focus on the dangers associated with the facility, which is about 35 miles north of Manhattan.
Situated in a 50-mile region with about 20 million inhabitants, Indian Point is located in the most densely populated area among all nuclear plants in the country.
The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board on Oct. 15 began a series of hearings on Entergy Nuclear’s application to renew the licenses of two reactors at Indian Point in Buchanan, N.Y., for 20 years. The existing permits expire in 2013 and 2015. The federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission will make its recommendation on the relicensing after the board, a judiciary arm of the NRC, issues its non-binding conclusion.
Grassroots and environmental groups are stepping up their calls for shutting down the plant. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo says the plant should be closed because of its risk to public safety.
The hearings in Tarrytown, N.Y., are focusing on ten “contentions,” or points of disagreement, regarding environmental issues and physical plant safety.
The issues raised by New York State and the environmentalist groups Riverkeeper and the Hudson River Sloop Clearwater include the effect of renewal on property values; the cost of human exposure to radioactivity; the impact of spent fuel pool leaks; the NRC analysis of alternative energy services; corrosion of pipes; the lifetime of inaccessible cable and electrical transformers; and legal and regulatory questions about the licensing renewal.
The approval could run into trouble because the state has denied Indian Point’s water quality permit. The plant kills billions of fish and eggs by drawing water from the Hudson River into the facility for cooling. Entergy Nuclear is appealing the denial, which it says would force it to spend $1.5 billion to build new cooling towers. The NRC has said it won’t renew the licenses without the permit.
Indian Point supplies about a quarter of the energy of New York City and adjoining affluent Westchester County, where the plant is located. Opponents of Indian Point say new energy sources could easily match the plant’s 2,000-megawatt capacity. A report released by Riverkeeper shortly before the opening of the licensing hearings puts the cost at $12 to $15 a year for residential consumers.
Robert Kennedy Jr., chief prosecuting attorney for Riverkeeper, said, “We have better, safer options. New York should lead with bold new policies to ensure that energy efficiency, wind and solar power play the key role in replacing Indian Point’s power.”
Over the years, grassroots and political pressure to close the plant has been somewhat sporadic. A dedicated group of core activists has persisted, but a long-term mass mobilization has never developed. But public concern re-awoke when one of the hijacked planes used in the 9/11 attacks flew over the plant, and more recently, when the nuclear disaster occurred in Fukushima, Japan.
Hopefully, the licensing controversy will add new evidence to the case for closing Indian Point.
The NRC says Indian Point could withstand up to a 6.1 magnitude earthquake, but a Columbia University study calls a 7.1 earthquake “quite possible.” Two earthquake fault lines pass nearby the plant.
The plant’s overfilled storage pools for spent fuel are leaking radioactive water into the ground and the Hudson River. A New York State evaluation described the plant’s evacuation plan as inadequate.
“I think this really spells the end of Indian Point,” said Kennedy about the licensing hearings. “The noose is tightening.”
Describing the plant, Marilyn Elie, a member of the Indian Point Safe Energy Coalition, who was with a dozen protestors on the opening day of the hearings, said, “It is old, dangerous and unnecessary.”
