Monday, October 29, 2007

US EPA Calls For Evaluation of Environmental Costs of Terrorist Attack

Just in over the AP, the US EPA agrees with FUSE USA that the environmental costs of a successful terrorist attack on Indian Point must be included in the SEIS. The EPA's position runs contrary to the NRC's wrongful attempts to eliminate same from any consideration in the EIS process.

NRC egregiously takes the position that Security for the plant needs to be dealt with on a ongoing, ever changing basis...we agree with that premise, but point out that Security in and of itself has nothing to do with evaluating the environmental costs should a successful terrorist attack occur. NRC chooses to ignore this very simple fact, and in ignoring this basic tenant of an Environmental Impact Study for Indian Point, they are failing to abide by the NEPA rules to evaluate all environmental impacts, no matter how GREAT, or how small.

Further, the AP story brings out another IMPORTANT ISSUE that FUSE USA has brought to the attention of the NRC. Entergy's application for a License Renewal, is not and amendment to extend their CURRENT OPERATING LICENSE, but in fact a application for a NEW LICENSE for the two facilities. Based on this simple fact, all EIS siting criteria issues should be included within the scope of the SEIS. The NRC is of the belief that the Current License Basis is sufficient to justify a GEIS (Generic Environmental Impact Statement) for almost all site specific issues. That belief will be challenged in the License Renewal Process for Indian Point.

In order for NRC to proceed toward that goal they required the resolution of legal issues regarding extensions. In January of 1989, NRC’s General Counsel issued his opinions regarding these issues, namely that the extension be accomplished via a new license rather than an amendment of the current license and that an environmental assessment would be required with either a finding of no significant impact’ or an environmental impact statement. Office of General Counsel (OGC) stated that based upon their review of case law and regulations, an antitrust review would not be required. NRC staff reached certain conclusions based upon OGC’s input and the opinions offered by other interested groups, among these, that the current licensing basis would “provide reasonable assurance of adequate protection” of the public. They determined that NRC should draft a generic environmental impact statement to be used in all renewal cases.

FUSE USA points out a glaring error in the AP story. Several news sources are reporting that the city of New York has filed a Petition to Intervene in the License Renewal hearings.

Various groups have filed lawsuits demanding hearings on the scope of the relicensing. New York City, just 30 miles south of the reactors in Buchanan, has formally requested _ without taking a position _ that it be allowed a voice in the decision.

This is what the New York Economic Development Corporation would LIKE EVERYONE TO BELIEVE. However, when said corporation was pushed on this matter in a phone conversation last week, they RELUCTANTLY admitted they are not a part of New York government, but wanted to defend their inclusion in the License Renewal process. Fact is, said corporation works closely with Mayor Bloomberg's office, but IS NOT IN ANY WAY LEGALLY A PART OF New York City government, and thus HAS NO STANDING. Much like NY AREA who is also trying to intervene, NY Economic Development Corporation is a Pro-Business, pro nuclear energy group wrongfully trying to elbow their way into the process. The NRC cannot allow Entergy, NEI and the nuclear industry to send wolves into the hen house dressed as sheep. NY AREA was originally started and funded with Entergy DOLLARS, and should have ZERO standing in the License Renewal process.

FUSE USA Web Site Launches

In breaking news from FUSE USA, our official organizational web site was launched today. We hope you will take the time to visit us at and let us know what you think of our efforts.

FUSE USA Senior Policy Analyst Speaks Mind in Letter To Editor

Tax Money for Big Energy

To the Editor:

Re “ ’70s Echo in New ‘No Nukes’ Campaign” (news article, Oct. 23):

The statements made with respect to corporate welfare to the nuclear power industry being on a par with taxpayer financing of other kinds of energy are absolutely accurate.

Hundreds of billions have flowed from the American taxpayer (in a variety of ingenious ways) to the nuclear industry and Big Oil. When you add in the attendant security costs for each, the sums expand beyond calculation.

Unfortunately, only minimal and sporadic financing has gone to the clean sustainable forms of power generation (wind, solar, geothermal and so on) and efficiency technologies.

Study after study has shown the need and potential for sustainable power, but the money continues to flow to the polluting industries. Why? Because big energy can pay the lobbyists and give the big campaign contributions — simple as that.

Michel Lee
Scarsdale, N.Y., Oct. 24, 2007

The writer is a senior policy analyst with Friends United for Sustainable Energy, a nonprofit energy policy think tank based in New York.

Tuesday, October 23, 2007

Last Day To Sign On to FUSE USA Formal Exemption Request

FUSE USA will be filing a Formal Exemption Request tomorrow morning seeking to set aside parts of 10 CFR 51. We will be accepting co-signers for this important filing through midnight this evening. If you would like to sign on, please send your name, address and phone number to by Midnight.

Sunday, October 21, 2007

Be Ready For Christmas Attacks By Entergy

Sure the NRC would deny it, but seems that Entergy has convinced the right people to get a board up and ready for some serious legal actions starting on December 1st. So, all of those who are planning on filing contentions, be prepared to start defending them right in the middle of the Christmas Season, as Entergy would love nothing more than to play the Grinch who stole Christmas.

Read the NRC Press release over on Green Nuclear Butterfly.

Thursday, October 18, 2007

Stop $50 Billion in Nuclear Loan Guarantees

Just in from the Green Nuclear Butterfly:

New day, new petition to stop $50 Billion in Nuclear Loan Guarantees...goal here is one week 1000 signatures, so any help is appreciated. Think it is very important that we have a Petition going into our elected officials here in the North East that is representative of their constituents.

Thursday, October 18, 2007

Oppose 50 Billion in Nuclear Loan Guarantees

The full court press is on, and the lobbyist for the Nuclear Industry (NEI) are walking the halls of both the house and senate in the hopes of pushing through $50 BILLION in loan guarantees for new nuclear reactors...Green Nuclear Butterfly is giving itself ONE WEEK to collect 1,000 co-signers on our Petition opposing these loan guarantees. Give us a hand by sharing this post, or linking to our Petition on your blog or web site. Post it to your list serves.

For HTML code email

A Serious Infrastructure Crack At Entergy's Indian Point Leaking Tritium Into Our Environment

Oppose 50 Billion in Nuclear Loan Guarantees

All Grassroots Environmental Organizations and Individual Activists
The picture you see is a serious infrastructure crack, and radioactive leak at Entergy's Indian Point. Our children, our spouses, and our parents and relatives are dying from allowable radiological releases of strontium 90, and tritium. No United States home owner can get insurance to cover their personal losses from a nuclear incident or terrorist attack. Now, this failing industry wants to build over 200 new reactors in your neighborhoods, and use your money to pay for it.

The Congress and Senate in committee can give the nuclear industry a blank check in the form of 50 Billion in loan guarantees, or they can strip them out.

Sign The Petition Right Now
Oppose 50 Billion in Nuclear Loan Guarantees
Enter your name:

Display as "Anonymous"
Click here to read this petition.
Newest 1 of 1 signatures
Sherwood Martinelli
Petition powered by

Thursday, October 4, 2007

FUSE USA Vice President in Hoyoka Magazine

Sherwood Martinelli is on the Board of directors of FUSE USA and is in a legal battle with the Indian Point nuclear power plant to stop its relicensing. He has almost 20 years of experience in taking on large polluters, and the utility industry. As founder of Save Wills Creek Water Resources Committee, played instrumental roll in seeing a $70 Million clean up of the Shieldalloy site in Ohio, including remediation of over 200 radioactively contaminated homes. As founder of the Guernsey County American Free Tree, he distributed over 400,000 trees to local schools and civic groups. Sherwood has a blog [ ].
Sherwood Martinelli, Vice President of FUSE USA is featured in the latest edition of Heyoka Magazine.
Read the article:

Tuesday, October 2, 2007

NIRS Executive Director Defends FUSE in Letter to New York Post

Breaking update on New York Post editorial which attacked FUSE USA. Michael Mariotte, the Executive Director of NIRS has sent a letter to the New York Post, which we have posted below.

Tuesday, October 2, 2007

NIRS replies to New York Post

Michael Mariotte

The New York Post is living in a nuclear industry fantasyland if it truly believes environmentalists consider nuclear power to be "clean." In just 5 weeks, more than 400 environmental groups (and 4,000+ people) have signed a simple statement: "We do not support construction of new nuclear reactors as a means of addressing the climate crisis. Available renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies are faster, cheaper, safer and cleaner strategies for reducing greenhouse emissions than nuclear power." And more signatures arrive daily. The Post’s argument doesn’t mesh with the facts.

The Post is also off-base when it claims no one ever has died from nuclear power in the U.S. Try that line on the Navajo people, many of whom gave their lives in the dirty business of uranium mining, and see how seriously you get taken.

Nuclear power remains what it always has been: dangerous, dirty and uneconomic.

FUSE is attempting to force the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to do what it refuses to do: ensure adequate oversight of the aging, unsafe Indian Point nuclear facility. New Yorkers should be applauding FUSE.

Michael Mariotte
Executive Director
Nuclear Information and Resource Service
Takoma Park, MD

Note to editor: you can see the statement referred to above, as well as the signers, at

New York Post Editorial Discusses FUSE NRC Filing

Everyone knows that the NY Post is very pro nuclear, pro Entergy, and rarely allows anti-nuclear sentiments to grace the pages of their rage sheet. So, when and anti-environmental group captures their attention enough to warrant and Editorial, they must be doing something right. So, it is with great pleasure that FUSE USA announces the mention of our organization in today's New York Post. It will be interesting to find out from the New York Post if they are going to allow FUSE a chance to have our views on this important subject published on their Editorial seems only fair, since they mention us in the below Editorial.


October 2, 2007 -- In facing its energy challenges, is New York heading in the complete opposite direction as the rest of the country - and, indeed, parts of the world?

Last month, an anti-nuclear group, Friends United for Sustainable Energy (FUSE) filed papers opposing the relicensing of one of the Indian Point nuclear reactors. A three-judge panel must now consider FUSE's claims that the federal government hasn't exercised enough regulatory oversight on the Westchester plant.

The same month, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission received applications to build and operate new reactors in Texas. The applications from NRG Energy Inc. were the first submitted in 31 years.

Nuclear-plant construction came to a screeching halt in the wake of the Three Mile Island incident in 1978 - even though America has never experienced a fatality, or even serious injury, attributable to nuclear power.

NRG submitted what are the first of what is expected to be a flood of applications in coming months for as many as 29 new reactors in 20 sites across the country, mainly in the South.

Such ventures don't happen in a vacuum: A company won't go forward with an application if investors aren't on board. As The Wall Street Journal recently reported, U.S. power companies are now prepared to invest as much as $90 billion in nuclear power.

Even some environmentalists are having second thoughts about their longtime adamant opposition to nuke plants.

They understand that nuclear power is "clean": Unlike coal or oil, it doesn't create the greenhouse gases that many see as contributing to global warming.

Meanwhile, France's President Nicolas Sarkozy calls nuclear power "the energy of the future" and has urged Germany to rescind its plan to phase out nuclear plants. France relies on nuclear power for 78 percent of its energy.

But, as the FUSE filing shows, New York - notwithstanding its own soaring energy needs - seems poised to retreat from the working, safe, nuclear reactors it has running, just as other states consider building new ones.

If New York is to be so foolish, it shouldn't be surprised if businesses move to places better able to fill their energy needs down the road.