URGENT: Call today-Attempt to repeal state law in House Ways and Means

[Diane TURCO]

Dear All,

We need your voice today to stop the legislature from repealing the current state law that prohibits new nuclear reactors "construction and operation" without voter approval. Unfortunately, Governor Healey and state legislators are pushing to repeal this law because it is perceived as a "barrier" to new nuclear. In fact, the current law gives WE THE PEOPLE the democratic right to have a say in our safe energy future. This law is the guardrail to protect our communities and environment and needs to stay on the books.

 

1. PLEASE call the House Ways and Means as they rewrite the energy efficiency bill, H.4744, and leave a message. The secretary is keeping tabs. She said she is receiving so many calls, she had to start a spreadsheet! Let's keep up the pressure!
"Remove Sec. 80 from H. 4744 that would repeal the state law that gives us the right to vote on new nuclear in MA."

 

House Ways and Means 617.722.2990

 

2. Then please contact your state rep to contact HW&M chair to remove Sec. 80, too. Our reps need to hear from us, too, to represent our position to the committee.

 

Rep. Luddy- 617.722.2582

**Rep. Xiarhos [on the HW&M] -617.722.2488

**Rep. Diggs  [Vice-chair of HW&M]-617.722.2380

Rep. Vieria-617.722.2488

Rep. Moakley-617.7222.2080

Rep. Flanagan-617.722.2080

 

Rep. Badger (Plymouth) 617.722.2060

 

 

Chapter 503 of the Acts of 1982, An Act pertaining to nuclear power, also known as the “Nuclear Power and Waste Disposal Approval and Legislative Certification Act,” requires approval by the voters of the Commonwealth, and certification of certain findings by the General Court, as preconditions for the construction and operation of new nuclear power in MA.

 

We have the right to vote. Keep democracy alive! Let the people decide!

Please share widely.

peace, Diane

 

 

[Diane TURCO]

Dear All,

Rep. Sabadosa and Rep. Scarsdale have filed an amendment #31 to remove Sec. 55 from H.5151 that would repeal the 1982 law that prohibits new nuclear construction and operation without voter approval.

 

https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/H5151/Amendments/House  Click on #31 for amendment

 

PLEASE contact to your state representative to sign on to #31 and then VOTE YES on #31 tomorrow when the full House votes. Please call your friends and neighbors to do the same.

Rep. Luddy- 617.722.2582

Rep. Xiarhos-617.722.2488

Rep. Diggs -617.722.2380

Rep. Vieria-617.722.2488

Rep. Moakley-617.7222.2080

Rep. Flanagan-617.722.2080

 

Rep. Badger (Plymouth) 617.722.2060

 

For all others:

https://malegislature.gov/Search/FindMyLegislator

 

Chapter 503 of the Acts of 1982, An Act pertaining to nuclear power, also known as the “Nuclear Power and Waste Disposal Approval and Legislative Certification Act,” requires approval by the voters of the Commonwealth, and certification of certain findings by the General Court, as preconditions for the construction and operation of new nuclear power reactors in MA. Amendment #31 keeps this law on the books.

 

It's our right to have a say in our safe energy future.

Please share widely!
Thank you, Diane

 

More info here:

https://mailchi.mp/138665728ca8/support-amendment-31

[Diane TURCO]

Dear all,

Thank you for all your calls! The  House Ways and Means Committee told us they received so many calls to remove Sec. 55, they had to start a spreadsheet. The committee receptionist said the calls were 100% to remove Sec. 55. Unfortunately, the bill came out of committee for a full House floor vote with Sec. 55 included. An amendment was added before the full house vote.  #31 [attached], to remove Sec. 55. was co-sponsored by Rep. Luddy and Rep. Flanagan who were the only Cape reps to sign on a co-sponsors. They deserve our thanks. 

But the amendment was bundled with a lot of other amendments and voted down on the floor vote. [attached] What a disappointment!

All our Cape reps voted for the final bill including Sec. 55. 

More on the vote in the State House News attached. 

Now we move on to the Senate. A lobby day is planned. Please let me know if you may be available to join us.

 

TOMORROW, Governor Healey's Nuclear Roadmap program will be on zoom at noon having been rescheduled from February. If you want to know what the state has for plans for nuclear, sign up. The state gave UMass Lowell $250,000 to promote nuclear under the guise of seeking input into our energy future. This is an attempt by the administration to convince us that new nuclear is the way to go. There is a link to the previous session here promoting SMRs and fusion.

Here is the link: https://www.uml.edu/sustainability/research/nuclear-roadmap.aspx

 

Also attached is the latest report by Dr. Gordon Thompson just released.

 

We need to keep up the pressure to keep our state nuclear free.

peace, Diane

[Diane TURCO]

 

Dear All-

                                     We need your voice today

 

Please contact the Senate Ways and Means Committee as they write a new energy bill and urge them to oppose any effort to repeal Chapter 503 of the Acts of 1982.

 

Chapter 503 protects the people of Massachusetts by requiring critical safeguards before any new nuclear power reactor can be built and operated in our state. It mandates emergency planning and effective radiation emission standards, and it requires legislative certification that these conditions have been met. Why would lawmakers give up their responsibility to ensure these protections are in place?

 

Just as importantly, Chapter 503 guarantees that Massachusetts voters have a direct say in whether a new nuclear reactor is constructed and operated. This is not an anti-nuclear law. It is a pro-democracy law that recognizes the public's right to participate in decisions that could affect our health, safety, communities, and environment for generations.

 

Governor Healey and some legislators are pushing to repeal this law because they see it as an obstacle to new nuclear development. But Chapter 503 does not ban nuclear power. It simply requires transparency, accountability, public oversight, and democratic consent.

 

If this law is repealed, Massachusetts residents could lose an important voice in decisions with far-reaching consequences. Chapter 503 is a vital guardrail that helps ensure that public safety, environmental protection, and community concerns are not sidelined.

 

                                             Please act today

 

Contact the Senate Ways and Means Committee and tell them to keep the law- Chapter 503 in place. Protect our right to participate in shaping Massachusetts' energy future.

 

Senate Ways and Means:   617.722.1481

https://malegislature.gov/Committees/Detail/S30

 

Sample messages:

*Do not include any repeal of Chapter 503 of the Acts of 1982 in any legislation.

*The current law establishes reasonable and responsible preconditions for any new nuclear power reactor in Massachusetts, including legislative certification of public safety protections. It also preserves the public's right to vote on decisions that could affect our safe energy future.

*Chapter 503 is not a ban on nuclear power. It is a safeguard that ensures accountability, public oversight, and democratic participation in decisions with long-term consequences for our communities and environment.

*Chapter 503 must remain Massachusetts law. We expect our legislators to protect the people, uphold democratic rights, and safeguard the environment—not repeal these important protections.

 

Then contact your state senator to contact SW&M chair: 

https://malegislature.gov/Search/FindMyLegislator

 

Keep democracy alive! Let the people decide!

Please share widely.

Peace, Diane

*******************************************************************************************

Here is a petition to sign:

https://www.change.org/p/urging-senator-barrett-to-protect-mass-voters-right-to-decide-on-new-nuclear-power-plants?source_location=psf_petitions

[You don't have to donate to Change.org]

 

More on the law:

Chapter 503 of the Acts of 1982, An Act pertaining to nuclear power, also known as the “Nuclear Power and Waste Disposal Approval and Legislative Certification Act,” requires approval by the voters of the Commonwealth, and certification of certain findings by the General Court, as preconditions for the construction and operation of new nuclear power in MA.

[The 4 page law is attached]

[Diane TURCO]

Dear All,

Please sign on to this petition. It appears the link was not working so here is a refreshed link. Pass it on, too, as we would like to send to the Senate this week. [no need to donate to Change.org]

The bill will be coming out soon. Senator Cyr is fully supportive so send him thanks, too. We are waiting to hear from Senator Fernandes. Give him a call-617-722-1330.

Thank you, Diane

https://www.change.org/p/urging-senator-barrett-to-protect-mass-voters-right-to-decide-on-new-nuclear-power-plants?source_location=psf_petitions

[Diane TURCO]

Dear All-

The Senate Listened — Chapter 503 REPEAL NOT in the Senate Energy Bill!

Your calls, emails, and unwavering commitment to protecting our communities made the difference.

 

Because thousands of people spoke up, the Massachusetts Senate did not include the repeal of Chapter 503 of the Acts of 1982 in its energy bill, S.3143.

 

This is a significant victory for the people of Massachusetts and for every community that depends on the protections provided by Chapter 503.

 

Senator Julian Cyr and Senator Jo Comerford, who, through persistent advocacy, led the effort in the Senate with the support of other senators. They stood up for the people, defended our right to vote on major nuclear policy decisions, and championed the legislature's responsibility to protect public health and the environment with safety preconditions as codified in Chapter 503.

 

Please contact Senator Cyr at julia...@masenate.gov/617.722.1570 and Senator Comerford  at jo.com...@masenate.gov/617.722.1532 and thank them for leading the way and working closely with us to keep Chapter 503 on the books. Cheer them wherever they go!

Also contact Senate President Karen Spilka (karen....@masenate.gov)  and Senator Mike Barrett (mike.b...@masenate.gov) to thank them for advancing an energy bill that preserves the vital public protections of Chapter 503.

 

The Senate embraced the view that Massachusetts can meet its clean energy goals  by investing in the carbon-free renewable energy sources that are already delivering results—including offshore wind, solar, energy efficiency, and other renewable technologies—without dismantling the public protections on nuclear power plants established in Chapter 503.

 

The challenge is not over.

 

On July 1, the Senate is expected to vote to pass S.3143 without the repeal of Chapter 503.  Earlier this year the House passed its energy bill , H.5175 with the repeal of Chapter 503.  We must now focus our efforts on ensuring that repeal is not included in the final compromise bill.

 

S.3143 and H.5175 must now be reconciled.  A six-member conference committee, including 3 House members and 3 senators, including Mike Barrett and Representative Mark Cusack, is expected to negotiate a final version of the energy bill that will go forward for a full floor vote. We will soon ask supporters to once again contact their representatives and urge them to reject any attempt to include the repeal of Chapter 503 in the final energy legislation.

Thank You to YOU!

This victory belongs to all of you. Your calls, emails, persistence, and passion changed the outcome. Together, we protected Chapter 503 in the Senate thus far—and together we'll continue working to ensure those protections remain in the final bill.

We couldn't have done it without you. Your voices truly made all the difference.

Keep democracy alive! 

Diane 

Cape Downwinders

Commonwealth Coalition for Democracy and Safe Energy

[Diane TURCO]

The Massachusetts Senate just released a bill that will impact families, workers and the planet. The bill represents a major improvement over February's house bill, but still needs significant changes through amendments.

 

We are asking you to help make the dream of a renewable, accessible energy future a reality by encouraging your Senator to co-sponsor these key policies. 

 

Contact your Senator now. 

 

Our Priorities include: 

 

• Halting the expansion of the gas system and protecting workers
   
• Stopping utilities from charging us, their customers, for advertising
   
• Removing subsidies for burning trees to make electricity
   
• Protections from Data Centers
   
• And more!
   

With your action, we can turn these policy goals into concrete action. Thanks to your grassroots activism, we were able to stop a climate bill that would’ve reversed years of progress in November and take steps towards energy affordability in February. Now, we need your help one more time to bring it past the finish line.  Here is the full action guide with more context and the full list of priority amendments.

 

After you write your Senator, keep taking action by:

 

• Sharing this email with your networks
   
• Joining our full coalition call Monday June 29 at 5:30 PM - RSVP here
   
• Joining us in the State House to pack the Senate Gallery during the vote on Wednesday July 1 - RSVP here
   

Join us in pushing for clean, affordable energy and send your Senator the Mass Power Forward Priorities today. 

 

In solidarity,

 

The Mass Power Forward Planning Team

 

[Diane TURCO]

Please see posters attached for Monday NDCAP! Please share widely.

We need you to push back on the nuclear industry propaganda.

Resources:

Dr. Thompson statement for the Marshfield lawsuit against Holtec is attached.

Donna Gilmore on dry casks:

https://sanonofresafety.org/

Pilgrim Watch beginning page 60:

https://www.pilgrimwatch.org/decom-handbook2025.pdf

 

THE NEXT NDCAP MEETING MONDAY JULY 27 6:30 Plymouth Town Hall

Two pro-nuke speakers to support Holtec. Come speak out for the community.

 

https://www.mass.gov/doc/july-27-2026-ndcap-meeting-agenda/download

 

https://standupfornuclear.org/ally-of-the-month/jim-hopf

Jim Hopf, Nuclear Waste Specialist, Nuclear Engineer, Californian Advocate, February ‘25

Meet the Nuclear News Curator and Waste Specialist

Jim Hopf entered into an early retirement to focus his entire efforts on nuclear advocacy. The Bay Area native from Chicago studied physics at MIT, earned a degree in nuclear engineering at the University of Texas, and worked in nuclear waste management for 25 years. 

Hopf began his career at General Atomics in San Diego, a private defense and technology company that has worked on high-temperature gas-cooled reactors and dry cask storage innovations, on top of their work in aerospace. Hopf worked on transportation and storage containers for spent nuclear fuel. Over the years, Hopf performed shielding analysis, criticality analysis, and cast system design. 

 

Hopf, with a “Replace Fossil Not Nuclear” sign, at a Save Diablo Canyon demonstration.

In the 2000s, Hopf became a prolific writer for the blog, ANS Nuclear Cafe, exploring double standards on nuclear, unjust public fears, and the need for new, tech-neutral policy. To expand his nuclear communication, Hopf started resharing essential nuclear energy news, starting in Facebook groups, before graduating to X (formerly Twitter), where he has become one of the leading sources of nuclear energy news. 

 

From 2018 to 2023, Hopf played a key role in the Save Diablo Canyon campaign, writing op-eds, lobbying California legislators, and attending the Public UItility Commission, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, California Energy Commission, and Diablo Canyon Safety Commission hearings in support of nuclear. Hopf is also proud to have helped the effort (again writing op-eds) that led to the Illinois Energy Transition Act in 2021 that saved Byron, Dresden, and Braidwood from premature closure. 

 

“If you played like a 1/1000 of the role of saving these four plants. And you said, how much the reduction in carbon from, running those plants for another 20 years would be. The math showed that the carbon you use over your entire life would be offset by 100 times,” Hopf said. “So far, these successes have been mainly in keeping existing plants open. So now we need nuclear deployed on a large scale, at a reasonable cost.” 

Interested in science from a young age, Hopf initially wanted to go into fusion or advanced reactors, but no jobs were available, so he went into nuclear waste management - specializing in the transportation of spent fuel from commercial nuclear plants. 

As an expert, Hopf said, there are no real, credible scenarios where nuclear storage poses a significant risk to the public outside the site. Undue fear of waste is one of the largest problems in the industry, according to Hopf. 

“A lot of people say recycling technology (will) solve the problem,” Hopf said. “But it’s a technological solution to a false public perception problem. If you don’t handle the sociological side, they’re not going to accept that either.” 

Instead of promoting recycling, Hopf likes to talk about the nuclear industry’s record on waste; over the past 60 years, nuclear waste has never harmed anyone. It is the only industry or energy source that not only contains all of its waste, instead of releasing it into the environment like many but proves with rigorous analysis that it will never be released into the environment. Hopf called it a standard of near perfection that no other industry has met and added funds have been already allocated for descendants if they need to manage the waste in any way. 

Hopf believes that the nuclear industry’s style of communication on waste and safety is ineffective and counterproductive. 

“They're very proud of these communicators that talk a lot about the unprecedented measures they're taking to keep you safe - to keep the public safe. Now, the problem with that message is that it directly implies that nuclear poses uniquely large hazards,” Hopf said. “It actually sends precisely the wrong message, and it makes people more fearful. The safety culture is out of control.”

Out of a belief in the utility of carbon pricing as a tech-neutral policy giving nuclear the same treatment as solar and wind, Hopf joined the Citizens Climate Lobby (CCL). CCL aims to get the nuclear industry behind carbon pricing and has seen moderate success; Exelon (now known as Constellation Energy)  voiced support for carbon pricing in a public document, in 2020.  

Hopf also created a nuclear action team with CCL, though it took some time and faced pushback from CCL leadership who were worried about offending certain members. The group informs CCL members on nuclear energy, often through slide presentations at CCL meetings, followed by Q&A sessions. 

On top of his work with CCL, Hopf aims to serve as a nuclear news source on social media. Hopf utilizes nuclear news aggregator sites to select the most interesting and positive nuclear news stories to share on his X account. Several legislative staffers have reached out to Hopf to tell him, they learn a lot about nuclear through his feed. 

“The fantasy is almost people may, to a significant extent, go to Jim Hopf’s Twitter feed to see what's going on in nuclear land,” Hopf said. 

Moving forward with nuclear development around the world, Hopf sees a need for repositories, even with an ideal closed fuel cycle. Hopf noted that nuclear waste is already smaller than other waste streams by about a factor of 10,000, so recycling to make that waste 100,000 times smaller won’t make a significant impact. 

“Repositories will help in people's minds, it'll help resolve the nuclear waste problem,” Hopf said. “I think that will have an impact on public perceptions and the politics.”

Hopf expects to see deep repositories across the world in the coming years. According to Hopf, efforts to site nuclear waste repositories in the U.S. have not failed because of local opposition, but rather state-level opposition. States feel they are being singled out as the nation’s “dumping ground” for nuclear waste.

Part of the value in Hopf’s advocacy, he says, is to help provide political cover to politicians by showing them that there is widespread support for nuclear energy and that the narrative is not dominated by anti-nuclear voices. 

 

Hopf, left, and Heather Hoff, the founders of Mothers for Nuclear, at the California State Capitol to advocate for Diablo Canyon Nuclear plant.

Hopf said he advocates for nuclear because he believes in the need to fight climate change and fossil fuels. 

“I want to maximize future nuclear deployment because it's become pretty clear that the way you increase overall public safety is to maximize deployment of nuclear because its orders of magnitude better than fossil fuels,” Hopf said. 

May 9, 2025

 

Lawrence Berlinski

Principal Engineer, NCI

Lawrence Berlinski serves as the Lead Oversight Manager of NCI with the responsibility to oversee Decommissioning and Dry Fuel Storage activities at the Oyster Creek and Pilgrim facilities.  In that role he ensures that all activities are in regulatory compliance, are performed with proper industrial safety and using the principles of ALARA

In recent years, he served as Shift Manager and Senior Reactor Operator at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Plant overseeing regulatory compliance, safe operation and post shutdown activities.   He also served as the Training Development Chairman, Dose Control Supervisor and Performance Evaluator.  As a member of the Oyster Creek Speaker’s Bureau he spoke with various groups improving the public’s understanding of nuclear power by explaining the theory of operation of power plants.  

In his early professional career, Berlinski worked as both as an Equipment Operator and a Reactor Operator at Oyster Creek for the Exelon Corporation acquiring valuable technical skills. .  He has over 20 years of distinguished experience with both the United States Navy and the commercial nuclear industry.  

Berlinski holds a BA from Seton Hall University and a BS from Thomas Edison State University.

 

 

 

[Diane TURCO]

oops-Dr. lyman poster sent by error. Dr. Thompson report attached.

 

Key Findings:

 

The ISFSI Hazard

*At Pilgrim Station, an independent spent fuel storage

installation (ISFSI) holds spent nuclear fuel (SNF) discharged from the Pilgrim

Station nuclear reactor. That reactor has ceased operations and is being

decommissioned. The SNF is a significant industrial hazard. It contains a large

inventory of radioactive isotopes that emit ionizing radiation. Moreover, some of

these isotopes are fissile i.e., they could be used to construct a nuclear explosive

device.

 

Nature of ISFSI Risks

*The SNF hazard at Pilgrim Station is a latent threat. A

variety of realistic events affecting the SNF could, to a reasonable degree of

certainty, yield severe impacts on people, society, and the environment. The

potential for such impacts is termed “risk” a concept that encompasses both the

likelihoods and the impacts of harmful events. The Pilgrim Station ISFSI poses

three, interrelated categories of risk i.e., radiological risk, proliferation risk,

program risk. In each of these categories of risk, events yielding severe impacts

could be in three, interrelated categories i.e., accident, attack, neglect.

 

Magnitude of ISFSI Risks

*At first sight, the risks from operating the Pilgrim Station ISFSI might appear to be low. The ISFSI consists of large, upright, cylindrical containers resting on a pad, surrounded by a security fence. Its routine operation does not require electricity or other external services. Sadly, that impression is misleading. The Pilgrim Station ISFSI poses and will continue to pose substantial risks over its lifetime for at least four, interrelated reasons. First, the ISFSI’s large inventory of radioactive and fissile isotopes makes it an attractive target of attack. Second, its risks will accumulate over future decades and, potentially, centuries. Third, the ISFSI’s role in the US nuclear energy sector will encourage neglect and “atrophy of vigilance” over the ISFSI’s lifetime. Fourth, the ISFSI was designed to minimize the costs of its construction and operation, and its design does not conform with international best practices for risk reduction.

 

Illustration of ISFSI Risks

*An example of risks from operating the Pilgrim Station ISFSI

is the potential for a fire in one or more of the multi-purpose

canisters (MPCs) that hold SNF at the ISFSI. Such a fire would be a

manifestation of radiological risk, perhaps exacerbated by program risk. The

offsite impacts of such a fire could be broadly comparable to the offsite impacts

from an accident that occurred at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear site in Japan in 2011.Those impacts have included multi-year relocation of tens of thousands of people, and the conduct of land decontamination programs costing billions of dollars and yielding huge volumes of contaminated material. Attackers could initiate an MPC fire using widely available knowledge and equipment.

That event would be within the envelope of worldwide experience of malevolence.

The numerical probability of such an event at Pilgrim Station over coming

decades is unknowable.

 

The ISFSI’s Lifetime

*The present licensee of Pilgrim Station i.e., Holtechas projected that storage of SNF will continue at Pilgrim Station until 2062. Events beyond the control of

Holtec or a successor licensee could substantially extend the storage period

at Pilgrim Station, perhaps indefinitely. Similar situations exist at numerous

other nuclear sites. These situations reflect two failures at the national

 level. First, the nuclear industry has been unable to establish a centralized ISFSI

that could receive SNF from the existing nuclear sites. Second, and more

fundamentally, the US government has failed to establish an underground

repository for SNF as promised in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. The US

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has expressed its faith that, if the period

of storage of SNF in ISFSIs extends indefinitely, each affected ISFSI will be

rebuilt at intervals of about 100 years.

 

Nature of NRC Regulation

* The Pilgrim Station License,  i.e., Holtec or a successor is legally required to act in accordance with NRC regulations and processes. Relevant actions could be onsite or offsite. For example, emergency response could involve offsite actions by the licensee and other entities. While the NRC performs some of its functions adequately, it exhibits major deficiencies. Notable NRC deficiencies, in the context of this report, include deficiencies in risk management i.e., assessment of risks and requirement of measures to reduce risks. The NRC’s deficiencies reflect a variety of external and internal influences, including regulatory capture, political interference, and a culture of groupthink. Underlying these influences is a false presumption by the US government that the nuclear industry is a “normal business”, whereas in reality the industry has special features that have national implications and require

governmental interventions.

 

Credibility of NRC Risk Assessment

*The NRC substantially under estimates the risks posed by ISFSIs at Pilgrim Station and elsewhere. The under estimation occurs because the NRC’s risk assessment employs stylized, limited analyses that ignore important realities. For example, these NRC analyses exclude realistic scenarios for attacks affecting ISFSIs and SNF transport operations. Also, these analyses exclude realistic scenarios for neglect and the atrophy of vigilance. In addition, these analyses use event probabilities that lack an empirical foundation. Underlying such failures is a fundamental institutional weakness i.e., the NRC conducts its risk assessment in an isolated cultural environment, .....continue on page 6 of the document.

[JOANNE CORRIGAN]

Hi Diane,

Almost impossible to read yellow info.   Please resend.   Thank you.  I potentially have 4 people coming to NDCAP.  😉

Joanne

Sent from my iPad

On Jul 24, 2026, at 5:16 PM, Diane TURCO <ttu...@comcast.net> wrote:



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cape Downwinders" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cape-downwinde...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cape-downwinders/805609506.125786.1784927797302%40connect.xfinity.com.

<Thompson Tech Rpt Version #3.pdf>

[Mary Lampert]

Hello:

The discussion on Monday at NDCAP is the integrity of the casks- will they leak? The speakers will say “NO” or at best the Ohio doctor will say very unlikely! 

Our job is to tick off how and why they will leak and harm the public and workers. Examples:

Vulnerability to attack

Insufficient aging management program- 1 cask and same cask every 5 years starting 20 years after casks loaded at PNPS

Inability to see inside canister/ no hot cell onsite

Manufacturing errors- canister and zirconium cover surrounding assemblies

Institutional neglect as casks remain here indefinitely

Etc

Remember make concise statements - don’t ask questions- questions allow them

To reply with BS spin and take up time so question time will be limited

Just a few thoughts

Thanks for all you guys are doing! 

Feel this pony show is to lay ground SMRs- dispel fear fuel onsite.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 25, 2026, at 8:13 AM, 'JOANNE CORRIGAN' via Cape Downwinders <cape-dow...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

Hi Diane,

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cape-downwinders/DCE9D30C-BCCC-4607-9644-4F6E36313B99%40verizon.net.

[Diane TURCO]

Hi All, 
Please see excellent doc by Mary Lampert/Pilgrim Watch on dry casks:

 

 

https://www.mass.gov/doc/memo-re-pilgrims-spent-fuel-dry-cask-storage-issues/download