| ||
| ||
| ||
 |
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Feds OK emergency plan for nuke plantCritics say plant must shut down
NEW YORK (CNN) -- Federal authorities have approved the evacuation plan for the Indian Point nuclear power plant near New York City, essentially overruling local officials worried that residents might not be protected in the event of a terrorist attack. The Federal Emergency Management Agent told New York Gov. George Pataki in a letter Friday it had "reasonable assurance" the plant's evacuation plan is adequate R. David Paulison, director of FEMA's Preparedness Division, said the agency would continue to work with the Nuclear Regulatory Agency on issues relating to security of the plant. He said next year's emergency planning exercise for Indian Point would include a simulated terrorist scenario. The effectiveness of Indian Point's evacuation plan has been at the heart of a bitter debate over whether the plant, 35 miles north of Manhattan, should remain open. Opponents, including dozens of municipalities and hundreds of local officials, say the plan is flawed and the plant should be shut down. Shortly after FEMA's decision was made public, the Nuclear Regulatory Agency, which regulates U.S. nuclear power plants, issued a statement concurring that "Indian Point emergency preparedness is satisfactory and provides reasonable assurance of adequate protection." In January, former FEMA Director James Lee Witt, hired by the state to conduct an independent review of the evacuation plan, said the plan was inadequate to protect the public in the event of a terrorist attack. Afterward, the four counties surrounding the plant refused to cooperate with the annual process of providing information that state officials needed to certify that the evacuation plan was up to date. The state, in turn, told FEMA that without the counties' information, it could not certify the plan. Paulison said the agency based its decision on detailed reviews of all state and local emergency plans and all emergency drills that took place in fall 2002, which according to FEMA were successful. While acknowledging that Westchester County had refused to provide FEMA information on its updated plans, Paulison said the county had "demonstrated an adequate level of preparedness by actively exercising their plans and participating in other planning and training events." Westchester County Executive Andy Spano said he was outraged at FEMA's decision, which effectively overrules the decision of the county and state not to certify the plan. "We have only been tested and drilled on a slow release [of radiation] that gives us the time, on paper, to get everybody out," said Spano's spokeswoman Susan Tolchin. "In a fast-breaking scenario, the plan can't work." Riverkeeper, a leading organization in the campaign to close Indian Point, called FEMA's decision "a slap in the face to every New Yorker who lives day in and day out with the threat of a catastrophic nuclear accident at Indian Point with little means of escape." Indian Point provides power to millions of homes in New York. The 2,000-megawatt plant has been the focus of much debate in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks, after warnings that terrorists were considering nuclear plants as targets. Opponents have argued that an attack on the plant would threaten the 20 million people who live within 50 miles of the plant. In a written statement, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-New York, said she was "extremely disturbed" by FEMA's decision. "It appears that FEMA has completely disregarded the findings of the Witt report," she said. "FEMA has also apparently ignored the concerns of the local communities that would be responsible for implementing these plans." Clinton, who does not advocate shutting down the plant, said she plans to call for Senate hearings to explore what else can be done to address emergency preparedness around Indian Point. Perhaps the only positive response to FEMA's decision came from Entergy, the company that owns Indian Point. Spokesman Jim Steets said the decision "affirms what we've been saying all along: that we have a good emergency response plan and we can adequately protect the public safety."
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
