23 December 2008 at 2:40:08 PM
It's not clear to me whether these are the same meetings, held twice to allow more people with different schedules to go, or if they are two different meetings. Will update this after I find out for sure. Update: per Scott B's comment, these are the same meetings but conveniently spaced for more people to attend.
Anyway, on January 6th
from 1:00-4:00 pm
7:00 pm to 10:00 pm
Two public meetings which are to help identify significant environmental issues related to the COL and to provide the opportunity to interested members of the public to submit comments or suggestions on these issues.
That said, what does it appear this is NOT for. Suppose you dang well don't want the extra two reactors there. I suppose they might allow you to speak but you don't get a choice. I''m continuing to say that I would very much like to talk to anyone who has been here, especially since before the original building of Comanche Peak, to talk about what has changed in Glen Rose for you, were you for or against the building? etc. Email me!
More info-seems that the NRC waited until the last minute to notify interested parties about this
Environmentalists were caught off guard when federal authorities sent notices on Christmas Eve about a public hearing on a proposed expansion of the Comanche Peak nuclear plant near the Dallas-Fort Worth area.
Officials confirmed that electronic notices of the Jan. 6 meeting were sent Wednesday. However, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which is holding the hearing, had posted an online news release about the meetings a few days earlier, on Friday.
"The NRC has a notification system that’s supposed to let interested parties know when these events are occurring in a timely fashion, and waiting until Christmas Eve to send that notice out certainly makes it difficult to get citizens alerted in a timely manner," said Tom "Smitty" Smith, director of the liberal watchdog group Public Citizen of Texas.
nuclear regulatory meeting
nuclear power plant
Latest Blog Post by salon -Last Show Tonight on SLAPP Suits
More Posts You Might Enjoy
Final Judgment in State of Texas ex Rel Best v Harper - 9/10/2019
Updated: Ambulance/Emergency Vehicles and Transporting patients-where? (2019)
Turk Case Against Somervell County Hospital District and Ray Reynolds STILL Ongoing, Apparently Altered More than 3 years later- Update Feb 2019
When Local Government Possibly Violates the Texas Open Meetings Act # 3 (Somervell County)
You! Leave a Comment! You Know you Want To!
1 - scott burnell
24 Dec 2008 @ 7:23:57 AM
Your first thought is correct -- the NRC is holding the same meeting twice so that as many people as possible can participate in person. We know the community around Glen Rose is in the best position to let us know what environmental issues need to be examined as the agency reviews the Comanche Peak application.
You are also correct in thinking anyone who comes to the meeting will have the opportunity to provide whatever comments they feel are relevant.
Scott Burnell, spokesperson
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
2 - carol geiger
24 Dec 2008 @ 11:27:17 AM
The meetings will take place at the Glen Rose Expo Center, 202 Bo Gibbs Blvd. in Glen Rose
In addition to the scoping hearing, NRC's news release states that NRC staff will be available for informal discussions with members of the public during “open house” sessions from noon to 1 p.m. and 6 to 7 p.m.
If you wish to speak or require special accommodations or equipment to attend or speak at the meeting you must register in advance you can do this by:
- contacting Michael Willingham by telephone at 800-368-5642, x3924 or via e-mail at Comanche.COLEIS@nrc.gov by Dec. 30.
- or register at each meeting no later than 12:55 p.m. and 6:55 p.m., respectively.
- Individual comments may be limited by the time available and the number of people wishing to speak.
The Comanche Peak application’s environmental report are available at:
NRC staff will also consider written comments on the scoping process, but they must be submitted no later than Feb. 17, 2009, either by
- mail to the
Chief, Rules and Directives Branch
Division of Administrative Services
Office of Administration
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Washington, DC 20555-0001
- or via e-mail at
3 - karen hadden
24 Dec 2008 @ 12:04:42 PM
Nuclear power is one of the most expensive means of boiling water. For more information on nuclear plants including a history of problems at Comanche Peak, go to www.NukeFreeTexas.org
Briefly, here are five fatal flaws to a nuclear power renaissance:
1. Nuclear Accidents
Nuclear power is dangerous. No amount of safety measures can control human-made mistakes, which have been the cause of reactor accidents from Chernobyl to Three Mile Island. This is why nuclear power is dangerous: you can engineer as many safety features as you want, but humans make errors and the consequences of nuclear accidents are devastating. Vast areas of land would be contaminated with radioactivity, remaining uninhabitable for hundreds of thousands of years.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has failed to correct safety problems at nuclear plants. Many of its own employees are concerned that the NRC is too tied to private industry to be effective in regulating plant safety. In one year in the U.S. there were 15 safety incidents per month - five of them serious enough to shut down plants.
2. Nuclear Waste
Nuclear power is not clean. It produces radioactive waste that remains deadly for hundreds of thousands of years. No country in the world has found a way to isolate nuclear waste from contaminating the environment over that amount of time, so we have no idea what the costs will be.
3. Security and Terrorism
Plant security tests are still inadequate – which is completely unacceptable in a post-9/11 world. Nuclear power increases the threat of nuclear weapons proliferation. Nuclear reactors have historically led directly to nuclear weapons programs in many countries. In practice, there is no way to segregate nuclear technologies employed for "peaceful" purposes from technologies that may be employed in weapons.
Nuclear power is still heavily subsidized, unable to survive without taxpayer-backed loans. The Senate recently considered funding the nuclear industry with up to $170 billion in subsidies. Cost estimates have been in the $12- 22 billion range for just two reactors at sites in Texas.
5. Climate Change and Global Warming
There are limited funds available for tackling global climate change, so they need to be used in the most efficient, productive energy projects. The high cost of nuclear power means that resources wasted on funding it won’t be available for faster, cheaper, and cleaner solutions to climate change. Additionally, large amounts of greenhouse gases are produced by the mining of fuel for nuclear plants and the construction of reactors.
The vast majority of public interest and environmental groups are adamantly opposed to nuclear power because it generates dangerous wastes, has huge unnecessary risks, and cannot rescue us from climate change.
Sustainable Energy and Economic Development (SEED) Coalition
You must be a registered member to comment on the blog.
Your first post is held pending approval to make sure you're not
a spammer bot
Or you can login!
New poster comments are moderated,
meaning they won't show up until approved... or not. Be patient-we
have lives outside this blog, so it might take awhile You want to be rude?
totally stupid? inappropriate? Racist? Bigoted? Flame war baiter? Your
post may be deleted. Spammers or people posting pretend interest comments
but really wanting to hawk their latest book or sell stuff or govt
propaganda flacks won't see their posts published. Comments do not
necessarily reflect the viewpoint of the site owner(salon).
If you have a problem with logging in or registering, please speak up
right away. Love your comments. Oh, except spammers
More on commenting
for Main Page
Sunday, November 17, 2019
Last Show Tonight on SLAPP Suits
Louis Vuitton Artistic Director Calls Trump a Total Joke (Keene, Texas)
Here's Creep Trump Giving the Finger to Female Astronauts
Impeaching Trump- Is it acceptable for a president to pressure a foreign.....
Why are Paul Manafort's defense attorneys helping Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman today?
Money Laundering 101- Trump seeks to get rid of regulations on offshore money
Been awhile. Send me an email at firstname.lastname@example.org with the names of who you're talking about, above. Also, the newspaper editor is no longer local, ie officed here, but the paper is run....
(What Happened to Jerry Jacene? )
I'd love to see the Hotel Guest books and see if Jacene's name shows up long before he officially *found* the tracks. I'd like to know if the Visitor's Bureau has emails wit....
(What Happened to Jerry Jacene? )
I see the land or that part of it is now in the hands of Glen Rose's own Corky Underwood.
Is Jacene still involved? I had already informed the Visitor Bureau manager (who's....
(What Happened to Jerry Jacene? )