Environmental Impact Statement - radioactive monticello

Appendix A
don't know what you're looking at because it's dominated with TLD's, thermoluminescent
dosimeters, which are gamma ray detectors.
Well, that's fine. We have a monitoring system that essentially will tell us when we have an
accident. We shouldn't need a monitoring system to tell us that. We should know that from
other sources. And what we should know is where are the reported releases going Because
unless we know where they go, we don't know where the receptors are. And unless we know
where the receptors are, we don't know what the biological consequences of that reception are.
And so the scope of this EIS needs to include a requirement -- you need to have data included
in this EIS if what you're talking about is whether the consequences -- I saw it on the slide.
What are the consequences of continued operation You need to know before you can say
with any veracity what the consequences of continued operations are. You need to know where
do reported releases go If you don't know that and if the EIS can't say that, you have no
business making any conclusions on whether the consequences, the environmental
consequences of your continued operations. (MS-D-7)
Comment: Extending operations at Monticello for 20 more years will also mean more
cancer-causing radiation emissions will be pumped into the atmosphere. (MS-S-1 0)
Comment: As with problems surrounding public involvement, problems surrounding
environmental concerns reveal broad segments of the population have been ignored by the
NRC. The NRC relies on studies that assume a healthy adult male who weighs approximately
150 pounds is the recipient of radiation emissions. (MS-S-12)
Comment: The NRC does not consider how radiation effects women, children, developing
fetuses, the elderly, people with immune deficiency problems, people who are obese, and
people who are underweight. The studies of radiation used by the NRC reveals a clear
discrimination against well over 50% of the population; it is sexist, ageist, and elitist. On this
latter point subjects are assumed to be healthy, i.e., individuals who have the resources to care
for their bodies and their diets. (MS-S-14)
Comment: The NRC does not consider long-term radiation exposure. It does not weigh basic
facts about human physiology. For example girls are born with all of their eggs intact. What is
the effect of long-term exposure to human eggs Will there be decline in human health and
abilities over the next two to ten generations (MS-S-15)
Comment: Generating electricity from nuclear material requires tremendous amounts of
energy to process the uranium. Much of this electricity comes from coal plants which produce
high levels of global warming carbon dioxide and high levels of mercury emissions which
ultimately end up in human bodies; the EPA now estimates that one in six pregnant women
have levels of mercury in their bodies high enough to jeopardize the development of the fetal
nervous system. (MS-S-17)
NUREG-1437, Supplement 26 A-1 8 August 2006