In all the "debate" above there is not a single bit of credible objective evidence that the NRC could use to deny the petition. And it is clear from the objective evidence available in other places that most of the actionable reasons (safety, negative impact on the resource) to deny it simply don't exist.

The rest is just opinion and guesswork and agenda. And much of it is downright inflammatory, arrogant, and self-righteous who-ha.

I suggest we all calm down, breathe, and understand the process. And take the type to form a credible, reasoned comment to submit to the NRC. And then submit it.

None of what you type here goes much farther than the 10 or so people who are reading this thread. Read Ryan Sabalow's article in yesterday's Star. He characterized all the poetic philosophizing above as "a deep rift". That's not exactly going to sway any political leanings one way or another. In the words of Sammy Hagar, "to me it's all just mental mast...ation".