Decommission Genoa nuclear?
September 17th, 2016

There’s a NRC meeting on Tuesday about the “License Termination Plan” coming up:
6-8 p.m. on Tuesday, September 20, 2016
Courtyard Mariott
La Crosse Downtown/Mississippi Riverfront
500 Front St. South, La Crosse, WI
Now think about it… why tear down what’s left of the Genoa plant? So asks George Nygaard! Shouldn’t this be a historical site?
Closed in 1987, Genoa nuke plant preparing for demo
My father worked on the conventional side of the Elk River Allis nuclear plant, a demonstration project way back when. That was decommissioned back in the early 70s and is now a garbage burner. When the demonstration project was completed, and they tried to sell it, no local utility wanted it! Good call! Genoa was another matter, and Dairyland bought it for $1. Still not a great deal, because here we are now spending millions on decommissioning. How much? See below… they’re not telling.
Here’s the NRC page, with zero links:
La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor
Where’s the info on this? Here’s the press release, does it say why are we having a meeting?
NRC to Discuss La Crosse License Termination Plan…
Well, it looks like it’s to discuss the “License Termination Plan” according to their notice. But what’s to comment on? Why is there no link? After much digging, FOUND IT! From the NRC’s page:
La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor, License Amendment Request for the License Termination Plan.
Accession Number: ML16200A095
Date Released: Wednesday, July 27, 2016
Package Contents
- ML16200A083 – La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor, License Amendment Request for the License Termination Plan. (39 page(s), 7/27/2016)
- ML16200A085 – La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor License Termination Plan – Chapter 1 – General Information, Rev 0. (19 page(s), 6/27/2016)
- ML16200A086 – La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor License Termination Plan – Chapter 2 – Site Characterization, Rev. 0. (83 page(s), 6/27/2016)
- ML16200A087 – La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor License Termination Plan – Chapter 3 – Identification Of Remaining Site Dismantlement Activities, Rev. 0. (24 page(s), 6/27/2016)
- ML16200A088 – La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor License Termination Plan – Chapter 4 – Remediation Plan, Rev. 0. (31 page(s), 6/27/2016)
- ML16200A089 – La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor License Termination Plan – Chapter 5 – Final Radiation Survey Plan, Rev. 0. (74 page(s), 6/27/2016)
- ML16200A093 – La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor License Termination Plan – Chapter 6 – Compliance With The Radiological Criteria For License Termination, Rev. 0. (114 page(s), 6/27/2016)
- ML16200A091 – La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor License Termination Plan – Chapter 8, – Supplement To The Environmental Report, Rev 0. (37 page(s), 6/27/2016)
- ML16200A090 – La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor License Termination Plan – Chapter 7, Redacted – Update Of The Site-Specific Decommissioning Costs, Rev. 0. (14 page(s), 6/27/2016)
Look at this — how do we comment on redactions?
Some other docs:
Decommissioning Funding Plan for Independent Spent Fuel
Decommissioning & decontamination cost study update
Alabama’s leaking gas pipeline
September 16th, 2016
Inline plugging device used to isolate pipeline segment for recovery efforts.
Gas leaking in Alabama…
Alabama, Georgia declare state of emergency after pipeline spill
Pipeline leak spilled an estimated 250,000 gallons of gasoline
Here’s where to find updates from the pipeline company:
It’s a long, long pipeline:
Note the focus here in the STrib report, on price, not the mess:
But that’s how it is everywhere:
Gasoline shortages, price hikes coming to East Coast after pipeline leak
Even though admittedly the pipeline is not “fixed” as of this writing:
It’s owned by Colonial Pipeline, which is owned by ???
Colonial Pipeline investigating gasoline leak in Shelby County
And it’s the BIGGEST gas pipeline?
Here’s an interesting post about Alabama natural gas pipeline explosions and permitting adventures:
Circular letter from Pollution Control Agency
September 14th, 2016

From the “Circular Logic” department, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency responded to my rulemaking Petition, looking for them to set wind turbine noise standards, specifically infrasound standards:
And here’s the response:
The bottom line… the full letter:
After consulting with colleagues at the Minnesota Departments of Health and Commerce, I have concluded that the current understanding of wind turbine noise and its potential effects is insufficient to support rulemaking at this time. Discussions will continue among the agencies listed above, and we will monitor the science (as resources allow) to inform our decision about rulemaking in the future.
Right… And note there was no consultation with the Environmental Quality Board.
On to the next step. It never ends.
For more info, check the video of testimony of Rick James, INCE, at the Goodhue Wind Project public hearing:
Rick James testimony for Goodhue Wind Truth
And prefiled testimony:
testimony of Richard R. James, INCE, for Wednesday’s hearing over in Goodhue:
A must read:
The “How-To” Guide to Siting Wind Turbines to Prevent Health Risks from Sound
And this was published earlier this month:

Withdrawal of Clearbrook transmission line!!!
September 13th, 2016
Just in (well, it came in a while ago, but I was being tortured at the U of M Dental Clinic):
YES!! Now, a quick Comment for the record, essentially a thank you note, PUC staff Briefing Papers, a Commission meeting, and Clearbrook is DONE!
Sandpiper Withdrawal? Comments filed today!
September 12th, 2016
Today was Deadline #1 for Comments on NDPC’s Petition for Withdrawal of the Sandpiper pipeline Certificate of Need and Route applications. Here’s what was filed:
Yup, that’s it. My Sandpiper transmission clients weighed in. I’ve been watching the docket, watching the inbox for service…. NO other comments, nothing, nada…
Just get to it. Quick – take a few minutes and send a missive to the Public Utilities Commission encouraging them to allow Enbridge to withdraw their application for the Sandpiper pipeline WITH PREJUDICE so that they can’t refile it again. Send to:
Daniel P. Wolf, Executive Secretary (dan.wolf@state.mn.us) Minnesota Public Utilities Commission 121 Seventh Place East, Suite 350 Saint Paul, MN 55101-2147
Ann O’Reilly and James La Fave, Administrative Law Judges
Office of Administrative Hearings
600 North Robert Street
P.O. Box 64620
St. Paul, MN 55164-0620
But it doesn’t end there, with zip comments… it gets weirder. I’d saw there was no notice from the PUC about a comment period, nothing. Here’s what they did with Hollydale, Notice, and there was a comment period and reply comments! In that docket, Xcel Energy filed to withdraw its Hollydale applications on December 10, 2013, and this notice was issued on January 10, 2014:
Here’s what we got:
And when I asked:
Here’s the response:
Oh my… what do I do with that? Guess I write a post about it!!!







