The Indian Point Nuclear Plant: Scourge or Savior?
MARCH 14, 2016
To the Editor:
Re “Indian Point: Past Its Expiration Date” (Op-Ed, March 7):
Paul Gallay and Michael Shank make a strong case for the immediate retirement of the Indian Point nuclear power plant. In addition to the recent major malfunctions the plant has suffered, the continuing ecological effects the plant’s antiquated cooling water intake system has on the Hudson River estuary and the high radiation levels observed in groundwater testing, the aging facility poses a threat to the regional food shed.
That threat comes in the form of land contamination from a large radioactive release, a factor that Victor Gilinsky, a former member of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said should be carefully considered during the license renewal proceedings.
Long-term contamination should be a major concern for a state that has a growing local food economy and is among the country’s top agricultural producers for commodities like apples, grapes and dairy. According to the Office of the New York State Comptroller, the Hudson Valley region has about 2,400 farms and 340,000 acres of farmland.
KYLE RABIN
Director of Programs
Grace Communications Foundation
New York
To the Editor:
While nuclear plant license renewal applications historically take 24 to 30 months for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to review, Entergy’s license renewal application for Indian Point 2 and 3 has been under review for nine years, including more than 37,000 hours of inspection and review by the N.R.C. This is due in part to the state’s delay in considering water use permits. As part of this process, the facility produces needed electricity under daily independent oversight by the commission.
The writers ignore the fact that tritium is a naturally occurring radioisotope that, in the words of the Environmental Protection Agency, “is one of the least dangerous radionuclides because it emits very weak radiation and leaves the body relatively quickly.”Tritium is regulated by the federal government, and it is widely recognized that the recent tritium release at Indian Point will not pose a public health concern.
As a former site vice president at Indian Point, I know from experience that the plant’s value as a reliable provider of carbon-free electricity can’t be erased by unmerited criticism.
JOSEPH E. POLLOCK
Vice President, Nuclear Operations
Nuclear Energy Institute
Washington
MARCH 14, 2016
To the Editor:
Re “Indian Point: Past Its Expiration Date” (Op-Ed, March 7):
Paul Gallay and Michael Shank make a strong case for the immediate retirement of the Indian Point nuclear power plant. In addition to the recent major malfunctions the plant has suffered, the continuing ecological effects the plant’s antiquated cooling water intake system has on the Hudson River estuary and the high radiation levels observed in groundwater testing, the aging facility poses a threat to the regional food shed.
That threat comes in the form of land contamination from a large radioactive release, a factor that Victor Gilinsky, a former member of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said should be carefully considered during the license renewal proceedings.
Long-term contamination should be a major concern for a state that has a growing local food economy and is among the country’s top agricultural producers for commodities like apples, grapes and dairy. According to the Office of the New York State Comptroller, the Hudson Valley region has about 2,400 farms and 340,000 acres of farmland.
KYLE RABIN
Director of Programs
Grace Communications Foundation
New York
To the Editor:
While nuclear plant license renewal applications historically take 24 to 30 months for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to review, Entergy’s license renewal application for Indian Point 2 and 3 has been under review for nine years, including more than 37,000 hours of inspection and review by the N.R.C. This is due in part to the state’s delay in considering water use permits. As part of this process, the facility produces needed electricity under daily independent oversight by the commission.
The writers ignore the fact that tritium is a naturally occurring radioisotope that, in the words of the Environmental Protection Agency, “is one of the least dangerous radionuclides because it emits very weak radiation and leaves the body relatively quickly.”Tritium is regulated by the federal government, and it is widely recognized that the recent tritium release at Indian Point will not pose a public health concern.
As a former site vice president at Indian Point, I know from experience that the plant’s value as a reliable provider of carbon-free electricity can’t be erased by unmerited criticism.
JOSEPH E. POLLOCK
Vice President, Nuclear Operations
Nuclear Energy Institute
Washington
