ML042320548

Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone Motion for Reconsideration and Request for Leave to Amend Petition

ML042320548
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	08/09/2004
From:	Burton N Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Byrdsong A T
References
+adjud/rulemjr200506, 50-336-LR, 50-423-LR, ASLBP 04-824-01-LR, LBP-04-15, RAS 8342
Download: ML042320548 (72)

Text

RAS g3qcA

. I.- DOCKETED USNRC August 12,2004 (3:47PM)

'* OFFICE OF SECRETARY UNITED STATES OF AMERICA RULEMAKINGS AND NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ADJUDICAllONS STAFF BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of DOMINION NUCLEAR CONNECTICUT, INC. :Docket Nos. 50-336-LR, 50-423-LR (Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3) :ASLBP No. 04-824-01-LR CONNECTICUT COALITION AGAINST MILLSTONE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO AMEND PETITION The Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone ("CCAM") moves herewith for reconsideration of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board's ("Board")

Memorandum and Order (Ruling on Standing and Contentions), LBP-04-15, issued on July 28, 2004, by which it dismissed the Coalition's Petition to Intervene and Request a Hearing on the application of Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. ('Dominion') to extend the operating licenses for Millstone Nuclear Power Station Unit 2 to the year 2015 and Unit 3 to the year 2025.

CCAM further seeks leave to amend its petition to provide further support for its contentions.

Insupport of this motion, CCAM attaches hereto and incorporates by reference herein affidavits, with attachments thereto, on behalf of the following:

1. Ernest J. Sternglass, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus of Radiological Physics at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine;

2. Joseph J. Mangano, National Coordinator of the Radiation and Public Health Project (RPHP) based in New York, N.Y.;

3. Cynthia M. Besade; I

-Tebp/Mte- =sec Y_ o 41

7

4. Carol Ward;

5. Milton C. Burton;

6. Michael Steinberg.

With regard to each of the contentions submitted by CCAM, the Board determined each was inadmissible.

CCAM argues herein that such conclusions are not justified on the facts or the law and further argues that considerations of the public interest compel reconsideration in light of the information provided in the referenced affidavits and attachments thereto.

1. Contention 1 - Health CCAM's first contention asserts that:

(a) the "routine and unplanned releases of radionuclides and toxic chemicals into the air, soil and water have caused death, disease, biological and genetic harm and human suffering on a vast scale," and (b) 'cancer clusters have been identified in many areas close to Millstone" since Units 2 and 3 became operational and that the cancers 'are scientifically and medically linked to the routine and unplanned emissions of Millstone."

Dominion and the NRC Staff ("Staff") both refute this contention.

Dominion's application for license renewal nowhere addresses the issue of the effects on human health from the continued emissions to the air and water of radioactive effluent. See application.

As CCAM argued at the Board's June 30, 2004 proceedings, this issue is implicated in relicensing proceedings which require an analysis of whether the 2

licensee can, for instance, assure the reactors can be safely shut down during the relicensing term.

As stated, CCAM intends to rely in part on government documents which have compiled Millstone radioactive effluent emission history.' The government documents alluded to reter as well to the State of Connecticut Department of Public Health Connecticut Tumor Registry, and in particular the Connecticut Tumor Registry's publication entitled "Cancer Incidence in Connecticut Counties, 1995-99." This document was referred to in the declaration of Michael Steinberg, which was implicitly accepted by the Board despite its asserted lateness,2 and in CCAM's arguments to the Board on June 30, 2004.3 The official Connecticut Tumor Registry report released in January 2003 concludes that cancers affecting women are at their highest level in the New London area surrounding Millstone, in comparison with other areas within the state. The report finds that cancers affecting men in the New London area are exceeded only by cancer rates in Tolland County.4 Mr. Steinberg's further examination of the Tumor Registry report appears on the NRC's website and is available in ADAMS ML041770179.

The meaning of the term usafety" is critical to this discussion, as CCAM argued at the Board's June 30, 2004 proceedings. 5 This issue is implicated in relicensing proceedings which require an analysis of whether the licensee can, 1 Some of these documents are referenced in Millstone and Me (Steinberg), and see e.g.,

Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. Millstone Power Station Units 1,2 and 3 2003 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report of April 28, 2003 (available on NRC website at ADAMS, ML041270333) and Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. Millstone Power Station Units 1, 2 and 3 2003 Radioactive Effluent Release Report of April 29, 2004, Volumes I and 11.(also available on the NRC website).

2 LBP.04-15 at 12.

3Transcript of June 30, 2004 proceedings (hereinafter referred to as OTR") at page 29 4 TRat29 5 TR at 30-31, 37-40.

3

for instance, assure the reactors can be safely shut down during the relicensing term.

The operational history of the Millstone nuclear reactors is instructive. As recently as March 7, 2003, Millstone Unit 2 suffered a reactor trip - and was not safely shut down. Over a 24-hour period following the trip, an 'abnormal" release of radioactivity occurred which was acknowledged by Dominion to be "an increase in airborne radioactive material released to the environment that was unplanned or uncontrolled due to an unanticipated event.... The amount of iodines released was higher than normal due to fuel defects.' 6 As the affidavits of Dr. Sternglass and Mr. Mangano declare, extremely small doses of radioactivity carry with them serious health consequences. These health consequences may not be immediately apparent, but they can cause devastating illness and death.

It is CCAM's position that in the present relicensing proceedings, it is incumbent on the regulating authority to consider issues relative to safety in the context of current knowledge and information about the human health effects of even low doses of ionizing radiation. Stemglass Affidavit at paragraph 28; Mangano Affidavit at paragraph 11.

Dr. Sternglass points out that the Journal of the American Medical Association has recently published a study linking dental X-rays at low doses to pregnant women in their first trimesters and subsequent low birth weight. Sternglass Affidavit at paragraph 27.

6 See Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. Millstone Power Station Units 1, 2 and 3 2003 Radioactive Effluent Release Report at 2.1.4.

4

CCAM's contention is not based on theory alone. The Affidavits of Cynthia M.

Besade, Michael N. Steinberg, Carol Ward and Milton C. Burton attest to personal and indirect familiarity with more than 67 victims of cancer who either worked at the Millstone Nuclear Power Station or lived nearby or spent considerable time in the immediate area. Certainly their affidavits do not comprise an exhaustive identification of cancer victims in the Millstone community nor among former Millstone workers.

The fact of high rates of cancer among women, men and children in the Millstone community - and planned and unplanned releases of radioactivity from Millstone to the environment - have previously been documented but to date have not been addressed in the ongoing 'monitoring of Millstone operations by the NRC.

The present application is missing a significant chapter: a chapter seriously identifying and analyzing the health crisis CCAM believes Millstone has played a significant part in bringing to bear upon its host community.

CCAM has demonstrated its first contention is legally admissible.

2. Contention 2 -Terrorism CCAM contends in its second contention that Millstone Units 2 and 3 are terrorist targets of choice. The amended petition further states:

The federal Office of Homeland Security has identified the Millstone Nuclear Power Station as a primary terrorist target. It is an unprotected nuclear weapon awaiting detonation. As long as Units 2 and 3 generate electricity, the facility is a key element of the region's infrastructure and all the more appealing as a terrorist 5

target. As a nuclear weapon, Millstone possesses the radiological potential of thousands of Nagasaki and Hiroshima-size bombs. While it is operating, Millstone cannot be protected against a malevolent attack.

The Board determined that this issue cannot be considered in a relicensing proceeding in light of the NRC decision in CLI-02-26 released on December 12, 2002 ("McGuire").

Inthe intervening time since the McGuire decision was released, the federal 911 Commission has released its report of the September 21, 2001 terrorist attacks, including in its findings that the terrorist masterminds considered diving fully fueled passenger jumbojets into the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plan 29 miles north of New York City- instead of flying directly over it as actually occurred.

In common with Indian Point - and in contrast to the McGuire and Catawba facilities in the Carolinas - Millstone is a critical component of the infrastructure of the Northeast Corridor linking metropolitan New York to metropolitan Boston. In common with Indian Point, Millstone is located on the shores of a water body near densely populated areas close to airports and it was not constructed to standards that would repel or resist such an attack.

CCAM re-asserts that the Millstone Nuclear Power Station has been identified by the federal Department of Homeland Security as a primary terrorist target.

CCAM does not have access to the Department of Homeland Security's records.

However, this fact was reported by then-Governor John G. Rowland to the news media in his release of a letter to the federal agency referencing that agency's 6

identification of Millstone as a "Connecticut site of 'high interest' for additional security protection."' Other media reports have quoted the federal agency staff as identifying Millstone as a primary terrorist target.

Inlight of these circumstances, the NRC should re-assess the rationale it expressed in McGuire in support of its disinclination to permit consideration of potential acts of terrorism in reactor relicensing proceedings.

The present application is seriously deficient in completely lacking information as to how the facility will be refurbished to withstand terrorist attack - or the design basis accidents which will most probably occur in the event of a terrorist attack.

CCAM has demonstrated its second contention is legally admissible.

Contention 3 - NPDES Permit ,

In contention 3, CCAM asserts that Millstone Units 1 and 2 operations require the uninterrupted flow through intake and discharge structures of cooling water, which conduct requires a valid National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit and the facility lacks such a valid permit.

CCAM asserted in its Amended Petition applicant has submitted false information with regard to its permit status. As an example, Dominion represented that it had filed complete documentation of its NPDES permit.

However, Dominion withheld its Emergency Authorization ("EA")

as issued by the Department of Environmental Protection in 2000.8 This EA derives from earlier EAs which the DEP began to issue to Northeast Utilities See Hartford Courant, December 12, 2003, "Rowland: 'Let Us Do the Worrying'"

8 See TR at 82.

7

("NU"), Dominion's predecessor, to enable it to legally conduct the activities for which it pleaded guilty to conducting as federal felonies in 1998. CCAM appends hereto a copy of the EA. The permit itself has expired as a matter of law; furthermore, the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection has authorized waiver of the expired permit outside its lawful authority by virtue of the EA. Ineffect, Millstone has been operating with illegal "emergency authorizations" routinely since 1998. See attached statement of DEP Commissioner Arthur J. Rocque, Jr. ("I really hate these [EAs]. Statutes are very limited inwhat the [sic] define as 'emergency.' Continuing emergency is not even contemplated.")

The parties are in material dispute as to the validity of the NPDES permit and Dominion has submitted erroneous information with regard to the permit.

CCAM has demonstrated its third contention is legally admissible.

3. Contention 4 - Irreversible Harm to the Environment CCAM asserts in its fourth contention that the operations of Millstone Units 2 and 3 have caused devastating losses to the indigenous Niantic winter flounder population; the operations of Millstone Units 2 and 3 have caused irreversible damage to the marine environment; and continued operations will increase the severity of the environmental damage.

CCAM has demonstrated its fourth contention is legally admissible.

The applicant's submissions acknowledge that Millstone operations have contributed to the collapse of the Niantic winter flounder; however, the applicant 8

attributes the collapse principally to other causes, including supposed overfishing.

On this point, there is a substantial difference as to material facts.

During the June 30, 2004 proceedings, CCAM quoted from a passage contained in one of the state DEP documents intended to be offered as evidence in these proceedings as follows:

The adult flounder stock size in the Niantic River has already declined by 95% from 1986 (76,180 fish) to 2002 (4,124 fish).

This DEP memorandum, and others, support CCAM's contention that Do minion is principally responsible for the ongoing devastation to the local fish stocks and the marine environment, contrary to the representations contained in the application.

The NRC staff reviewing the application have had no difficulty identifying pertinent documents from state records. 9 CCAM, as stated, is prepared to produce all pertinent documents from governmental records and other sources to prove this disputed contention at hearing.

5. Contention 5- Technical Defects CCAM asserts in Contention 5 that both Units 2 and 3 suffer technical and operational defects which preclude safe operation. These defects have led to numerous unplanned shutdowns when the reactors go from 100 per cent power to zero power in less than one second - an extraordinary physical phenomenon which necessarily and obviously exposes the reactors and their components to 9See attached three letters to the NRC file from Richard Emch, project manager, dated May 24, 2004, May 24, 2004 and June 1, 2004.

9

sudden changes in heat and pressure of great magnitude. These experiences cause mental fatigue and embrittlement.

The applicant has not addressed this issue nor factored it into its analysis During the June 30, 2004 proceedings, the following colloquy occurred:

Judge Young: The earlier part that you mentioned, that there was apart that talked about operating experience, in that portion is there any specific discussion of the shutdown history or -

Mr. Lewis: I don't think so. I don't think there is - I mean, and I think that the experience that we've looked at is: when have failures occurred, and why have they occurred, and what have people done to fox them? So I don't think that there is a specific discussion of, you know, what's been the shutdown history of the plant.

TR at 163.

CCAM appends hereto an exhibit, produced by Dominion in other proceedings, which purports to list Unit 2 and Unit 3 shutdowns and their triggering events. On May 5, 2003, Dominion was notified by the NRC that it had crossed the threshold from 'Green" to 'White" for 'Unplanned Scrams Per 7000 Critical Hours." There had been four unplanned scrams between November 2003 and April 29, 2004.10 Unit 2's history of excessive numbers of scrams is an issue material to these proceedings because it directly implicates the quality and depth of the applicant's aging management assessment.

'° See Letter to David A.Christian dated May 5,2004 from A. Randolph Blough, attached hereto.

10

Although the applicant, under leading questioning by the Board," stated that it had looked at "historical" information in informing its analysis, and although the applicant cited to Section 4.3 of the Unit 2 and Unit 3 applications, it appears upon review of each section that the discussion of metal fatigue and its implications for the two reactors is closely mirrored, with no discussion of Unit 2's history of excessive unplanned shutdowns and, hence, their effect on aging.

There is indeed a dispute as to material facts which can only be addressed at a hearing.

Similarly, the Board was incorrect in rejecting CCAM's contention as regards Tables G-3-2 and F-3-1 and the SAMA analysis. The Board incorrectly concluded that CCAM's contention challenged an NRC policy, when it clearly challenged decisionmaking which may permit Dominion to avoid implementation of safety measures to protect the public in a design basis accident. It is CCAM's position that, once having been identified as features which would aid in protection of the public under such circumstances, these features should not be rejected on pure cost-benefit analysis grounds.

As to the SAMAS issue, and as to CCAM's other issues of technical defects, CCAM has demonstrated its fifth contention is legally admissible.

Contention 6 - Evacuation In its Sixth Contention, CCAM argues that neither Connecticut nor Long Island can be evacuated, although both may be required to be in the event of a terrorist attack, in the aftermath of a terrorist attack leading to a design-basis accident, or otherwise when necessary.

" SeeTR at 153, 159 11

The Board determined that evacuation plans are outside its purview in relicensing proceedings. Its rationale is based in part on its reliance that the NRC adequately updates emergency evacuation plans as appropriate.

However, this reliance is misplaced. At best, the evacuation zone encompasses a ten-mile radius from Millstone. Current circumstances and faithfulness to reality and common sensed dictate that Suffolk County, Long Island, with its 1.75 million residents - not to mention the residents of Hartford, the state's capital, and New Haven, the state's educational and cultural capital and all points ion between which are within 50 miles of Millstone -should be included in the evacuation plan although they are just a few miles beyond the 10-mile radius.

CCAM has demonstrated its sixth contention is legally admissible.

Respectfully submitted, Nancy B!!/nh Esq.

147 Cross Highway Redding Ridge CT 06876 Tel. 203-938-3952 Ct5550 12

08/03/2004 20:59 4126816251 PAGE 01 UNITED STATES OF AMMRICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I1E PFRE TlE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In th, atter of DO N NUCLEAR CONNECTICUT, INC.: Docket Nos. 50-336-L 50-423-LR (Mll! t ne Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3)  : ASLBP No. 04-824-01-LR DECLARATION OF ERNEST .. STERNGLASS 1, J. Sternglass, do hereby declare as follows:

1. I ur above the age of eighteen (18) yeam and I believe in the obligation of an oath.

2. 1 de at 4601 Fft Avenue in Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, 15213.

3.1 mit this declaration in suppoit of Camnecticut Coaliton Against Millstone Interventiol in the o e erened matter.

4.1 Pfessor Emeritusof Radiological Physics at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medi e nd have written and published extensively in the aea of low-level radiation and humaj health, m about the advesse effects of radioactive emissions from he Mlste NudearPower Staton n aritcular.

Stat n thre autho of the book 'Secret Fallout:'Low-Level Radiation from Hiroshima to Tre Mcile Is'published by McGTaw-Hill in 1981, of the review articde Environmental Radiation d n 4 ii" pablished bythe University of California Press in 1972, and the artide Cancer Moali y aues Around Nuclear Facilities in Connecticut" published in 'Radiation Standards id Huan H&alt: Roceedings of a Congrsional Seminar February 10, 1978, by The Envrw tal Policy ]tite in Washington DC. The facts and statements contained in these publications are incorp - dby reference herein as references 1, 2 and 3 tvsectively.

6. 1 av1 published a series of papers on the effects of low-level environmeatal radiation on human it and development produced by nuclear weaponS tesk and reactor releases for dte 1a1

08/08/2004 20:59 4126816251 - PAGE 02 forty y mu s, and havetestified on this subject at hearings held by the U.S. Congress, the Nation d Acade ny i Sciences, State Legislatures and U.S. Govenment Regulatory Agencies as an exp rt co

7. is y professional opinio that the radioactive releases from the Millstne Nuclear Pow Statia sr ice Its stattup in 1970 have caused and will continue to cause excess infant mortality, W brt ig n, leu1emia and cancer as well as increased rates of both chronic and infectious dis in the to s amund Millstone as well as in New London County and Connecticut as a whole.

8. co nding to the NRC publication 'Radioactive Matials Released Fmm Nuclear Power Paints ICR -2907), by 1987 Millstone had released a total of 32 Curies of radioactiv(

Iodine Particulats into the air which include the highly c in c Sirontium-90 and Iodit e

-131. t with 6.7 million Curies of Total Fission and Activatictt gases such as Xenonmd Krypto2 d the higtliquid rleases of Mixed ion and Activation Products of any nuclea r plant t United

' States, na y 581 Curies or 581 trillion picoCuries, the unit of concern i and dri water.

9. l a ingle year, 1975, Mlstone released a rcord high of 9.99 Curies of Iodine and P arti sinto 1he air, mor that twice as high as the 4 Cuiies released shotly after startup in 1971, t her with 29.7million Curies of Total Fission and Activation Gases, and 199 Curies i f liquid 4 ed Fission and Activation Products into Long Island Sound. also a record for all U.S.

nudea r

10. e ween startup of Millstone in 1970 and 1975, as shown in the 1978 Millstone report (3 )

cancer ity rme 58% in Wateiford wher the reactor is located, 44% in New London 5 mil to the nor 27% in New Haven 30 miles to the west, 12% for the State of Comcticut as a whole, 9i n Rhode Island, 7% in Massachusetts and 1% in New Hampshire, while it actull ciby 6% in the most distant New England state, Maine, following the patter df Stronti m 90 in the milk shown in the same report.

11. own in Table 9 of reference (3), wlile the Strontium-90 concentration in the milk dectin Pr fi the U.S. as a whole between 1970 and 1975 from 8 picoCtuies perliterto only 3 p7, it rose i m i 9.8 in 1970 to a high of 15.8 in 1973 and 14.8 in 1974 near the Millstone Nuclear P ant, t 10.7 by 1975. This is far in excess of the U.S. average of 3 pC/L ruling out any signifint contrbution to the local milk from bomb test fallout by Frce and China that continujd unt 1S CI

08/08/2004 20:59 4126816251 PAGE 03

12. AsbowninTabe lo0frefemnce(3)thecalWedyedlyemadoxdoseto'boneofac ild due to X excess Strontium-90 within 10-15 miles of the plant in exce of tihe yearly dose for t e U.S. r

• from33 millirm per year in the first full year of operation to 204 mmmnyr by 1974, nearly timea the normal background level of 70 mrem/yr in Connecticut

13. 1E ;e dosws due to Strontium-90 alone may be compared with the 15 mm/yr to any o peni der current NRC regulations, the 2 mrm produced to bone marrow in a typical ch X-ray .f child, and the 80 rreni/y to a developing fetus found to produce a doubling of the of cli od leukenia mi the studies of Dr. Alice Stewart cited in Reference 7 of reference (3) f.

exposu r n the mohes womb to X-rays in the first three months of pregnancy.

14. :b se considerations, later suppoted by the more recent studies of Strontium-90 meas din baby U togetw with effects on cancer micidence and infant mortality as reported by submit ed in the present case and referred to here as reference (4) provide overwhelming eviden efor the xi t c of a causal relationship between the abnorally bighilevels of Stromtium-90 in the nilk and the pa tem of cancer changes at various distances from the Millstone plant

15. ' existnce of a direct causal relationship between Strofium-90 released from nuclear rea an increased risk of cancer is very strongly supported by the finding descibed by Ma 4)ptint baby teeth of cbildren diagnosed with cancer have close to double the conceni on of Strontium-90 than cbildren born the same year and in the same area. This fmndin has led lawsuit haying been filed in Forida against the Florida Power and Light cion4y by the family f child with a very high Struntium-90 tooth concetration seeing compensation, a suits which fe judge ruled to be of sufficient merit to go to trialin 2005, despite etorts of the defenda nt hhave it dismissed (5).

16. ctuinted in reference (3), this conclusion is stil further supported by the fact that types o that rose mosttrongly in the Connecticut area near the Milstone Nuclear Plant exacily that have been found to be most sensitive to radiation in earlier studies by national d interit o standard setting orgaizations, namely those that increased the most by 1975, such reiabmcancen (37%), breast cancer (12%) andpancreatic cancer (32%).

17. wise, further support for a causal relationship of nuclear plant releases and adverse ht alth effe Zs ided by the fact cited by Mmicuso et al.(5) cited in reference (1) that cancer deaths showeda uch g rise in women than in men, namely 17% for whit women and only 11%Ifor

08/08/2004 20:59 4126816251 PAGE 04 white anal s This same difference between males and females was found by Mancuso and his investigat ns for atomic workers at the Hanford Nuclear Plants exposed to low doses of both intmal e posUes to critical organs due to iWhaled and ingested radioactive elements similar to t; released b Millste over a period of years, together with protracted exterl exposures frmm gamma ra produced by fission products accumulated on the ground, rather than to very short rth? f'n&

A"-J bvw w"Z

-~ 40 QW in AM Aitot~inh S4l. O

,wvAnn'p AB..flQ-s I

18. A r newed rise in infant mortality in the six towns nearest Millston took place after a sh decline 18% when all three units had been shut down for most of 1996-97 as described in Ta le 9 ofthe20reportbyMangano(4), withMsmallr declineof 3.1%in 1998.99 Zlativeto 1994 95, 4

followed a rise of 8.8% in 2000-01. This is very strong evidence indicating that even the xn smaller reles from the two remaining PWR type of reactors continue to adverely affect the hamlt of the ne~orn so that there can be no safe operation of any existing type of nuclear plant for the devel children on whom the future of our nation depends.

19. TI much greater nisk to human health from radioactive gases and particles that am inha4 or inged ad coentrate in certain cdtical organs such as the bone mamrow or in hormone prodnlng glands suci as the pituitary gland targeted by the highly radioactive daughter product of Strontiu l 90, the e4 aent Yttrium-90 that has different chemical properties andleaves the bmne to cocen in soft tissaes. This results in very high local doses to both the bone maow and the critical hornione producing Undg orerlong periods of time that gready exceed the whole-body dose and result cancer andl other adverse effects on health hundreds to thousands of times greater than had been

-as expected b a linear extrapolation to low doses of the risk from short external exposures such asI received b the sUVivors i Hroshima and Nagasaki or individuals exposed to medical X-rays tl do not coin specific organs, as desclbed in the ECRR report (6).

20. It islunporant to note that exposure to low levels of Strontium-9o nd other bone seeking radioactivJ chenicals routiely released by nuclearplants that resemble Qilcium do not merely incrcase t t risk of bone cancer or leukemia, but they weaken the inue defenses provided by ie white cellstof the blood that originate in the bone marrow. As a result the rate of cancer dcveloprDjrt all over tlJ body normally held in check by white cells is increased, and the defenses against infectious iiseases such as influenza, pneumonia and AIDS are lowered, increasing both total infant mality due to all causes combined as discussed in references (1X2)(3) and (6).

21. Unf xtDately for the protection of human beflt, the operators of nmclear plants such as Millstone ire no longer required to measue Strontium-90 in the milk, the soil, the water and othe4 l I

08/08/2004 20:59 4126816251 PAGE 05 ent btl samples, vor does the government measure bone conctrations of this elementa ter 19;2,un milk cro ons of this critical clement each month in a series I5 cities across the ration ,e 1990. Thus, presetl the openaors of nuclear reactors only.,easure gamma ray emitting ements suci as Cesium-137 that can be more eaily and cheaply measured than Stron um-cOrlit 90 tht CUits anly short uange electrons that caot penetrate the Geiger counfrs used for gamm i rays, and Obich requres mo costly laboratoxy procedues for each sample.

22. As ecenty brouh out in the ECCR repowt (6), the reason why the risk of low expou due to inhaledoringetedradioactive chemicals is some 100 to1000 tumes greater k the same d dft to short exposures is that for the low daoes given over a long period the damage y freradi ~s of oxygen dominate over direct damage to the DNA and cell membranes. This I to a dose-r omse curve that rise extremely rapidly for very small doses and then flattens out at doses, causing the eror made by a linear extraolation to zero dose used to establish the eg ey standards for permitted releases from nuclear Oznts.

23.Th ,the ECRR report states in paragraph 10 of its executive summary " that the present cancerepr is a consequence of exposue to g a atmospheric weapons fallout in the peric 1959-63 a d that more recent releases of radlolsotopes to the environment from operatiol of the nuclear fuel cycle will result In signifieant Increases in cancer other tyi s of IIU health (Emphasis added).

24. ThM3 in the concluding paragraph of the executive summzy, it says that it is 'the committee belief that nuca power is a costly way of producing energy when human health deficdt ar indudedinthe overal assessment" andat e envirnmental coequences of radioajctive discharges must be assessed in relation to the total eonment, including both direct and indirectefl on all living system(s6).

onts

25. Ald the most serious airborne radioactive releases so far have occurred from the operation f Unit I which was a Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) permanent closed im1996, studl ~es described references (1) and (2) have found similar increases in infant mortality, low birthwei and cance: amund P uim zed Water Reactors (PWR) such as Sh bngpoar 'Pittsburghand indian Ploi Itnear New York City. Therefore, it is to be expected that a twenty year renewal of th; ces for Millstone units 1 and 2 would further incre the adverse effects o huma a health and h assocated cost in heath care, as well as the damage to wildlife, birds and fish tha t have been s alfmingly in recent years.

08/08/2004 21:59 4126816251 PAGE 01

26. firther increase of damage to uman health and eenvirm is not only due to short-liv radioactive dements such as lodine.131, but also due to the loig half-Jife of many cthe radioact e chemicals routinely released by nuclear plant such as the 28 yew it takes for the a 'vity of Stnm -90 to decrease by half. Thus, it is very likely that continued operation of the Mills ne Nulear twill fitrther increase the rates of cancer, low birthweigh infant mortality and c c diseases ah u hypothyroidism, diabetes, and other diseases related to immune and hormonal system as these elments accumulate in the underground water table ftom which wells w their wa r, making it impossible to safely protect the public.

27.n uncexpectedly great risk to the life gad future heAlth of the newborn due to very small doses of Iiation to criical organs has just been further supp ed by a study of the incidence premat leading to underweight infants as reported in the April 28, 2004 issue of the Journal olhe AmecMdical Association (7). This study revealedltat the very small dose deto scattxred to the thyrodin the neck of the motherprodced by just owne or two dentaJls~y duing thl fit three months of pregnancy, approximatcly 40 millirem each, significantly increa4d the risk otprmeature birth and low birth weight. This in turn is known to ihease infant mortai y as well as pArducing a greater danger of mental and physical problems for ;ifants who survive as result of n dtvances in neonatal ce, but at huge emoional cost to the faxily and rising ha Ith case costs to society.

28. In ie light of cment knowledge of the unanticipated seious aerse effets on h b ath of extren y small doses of prolonged environmental radiation exposures to Strontium-90 and fission pz uts as described above, it is my professional opinion that the Millstone 2 and 3 reac ors would nec to end all radiation releases in order to meet public health requirements for safety, a I that t re tbey hodd notbe granmted Ecese renewals to continue opj tions during the ed twent y renewal periodwithout demonstrating that this objective canbe achieved.

I iher declare the foregoing to be true and accurate to the best of my knowledge, informti4 and belief under pnaty of perury.

Dated: *ugust 8, 2004

08/08/2004 20:59 4126816251 PAGE 08 LIST OF REFERENCES

1) estJ.

3 SternglassL"Sccret Fallout: Low-Level Radiation from Hiroshima to Three Mil Island" ( cGraw - Hill New York, 1981) Available on the website www.radiation.org.

2) J. Stemglass, 'Evironmental Radiation and Human Health', pp.145-216, Proee lings of the Si h Berkeley Symposium on Mfathematical Statistics and Probability: Effects of Pollutin on Health", idited by M. L Lecam, I. Neyman El. Scott, University of Califoaia Pess, Berkele and Los Ang ics, 1972.

3) Er kest J. Stermglas, "Cancer Mortality Changes Around Nuclear Facilities in Cnnect",

pp. 174- 12, "Radiation Standards and Human Health: Proceedings of a Congressional Se Feb 1O,1978 puied y the Eirnmental olicy Istute, Washingto, DC.

4). J eph J. Mangano,"Risks of Cancer And Other Diseases From The Operation Of The Milsto Nuclear Pant' August 5, 2004, Radiation and Public Health Project, New York, N3 5). F esonet vs. FP, Case Number 03-140040-CIV-COHN/LYNCHC

6) Phi ippe P. Huel et al. -Antepaxtum Dental Radiography and Infant Low Birth Weight", I Journal a r the American Medical Association, Volume 291, No.16, April 28, 2004, pp. 1987-1993.

7).H* th Effects of Ionizing Radiation Exposwure at Low Doses for Raton Protection Purposes Recommendations of the European Committee on Radiation Risk", Edited by Chris 4usby with Ros die Bettel, Inge Schmitz - Feuc, Molly Scott Cato and Alexci Yablokov, Pished for the E MR by Green Audit Press, Castle Cottage, AberystwA, SY 23iDZ. United Klngdo.

(2003) Websit: www. euradcomorg 2003.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of DOMINION NUCLEAR CONNECTICUT, INC. :Docket Nos. 50-336-LR, 50-423-LR (Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3) :ASLBP No. 04-824-01-LR AFFIDAVIT OF JOSEPH J. MANGANO I, Joseph J. Mangano do hereby declare as follows:

1. I am above the age of eighteen (18) years and I believe in the obligation of an oath.

2. I serve as National Coordinator of the Radiation and Public Health Project (RPHP), a non profit professional research organization based in New York City.

3. My professional background includes a master's degree in public health from the University of North Carolina (1978) and a master's degree in business administration from Fordham University (1985).

4. I have published 20 articles in professional medical journals on health risks of radiation and I am the author of Low-Level Radiation and Immune Damage:

An Atomic Era Leaacv (Lewis Publishers, 1998).

5.An article I co-authored with others, entitled :'Elevated Childhood Cancer Incidence Proximate to U.S. Nuclear Power Plants," is posted on the U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission website (ML041750500).

1

6. For many years, I have collected data from governmental sources including the Connecticut Tumor Registry with regard to cancer incidence and other related issues with particular regard to the Millstone Nuclear Power Station.

7. Current findings of my research are summarized in a report entitled "Risks of Cancer and Other Diseases From the Operation of the Millstone Nuclear Plant," dated August 5, 2004, a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A.

8. It is my professional opinion, based upon my educational background, my review of governmental source material including filings with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, my work with the Radiation and Public Health Project and my review of scientific papers and reports that the Millstone Nuclear Power Station operations are responsible for increasing the risk of cancer and related diseases in the surrounding community as well have having a causative connection to the phenomenon of higher incidences of cancer in the surrounding community.

9. Further, it is my professional opinion that the Millstone Nuclear Power Station operations present a present continuing threat to the health of the community.

10. Further, it is my professional opinion that as long as the Millstone Nuclear Power Station emits radioisotopes to the environment it will be a threat to the health of the community.

11. Further, it is my professional opinion the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission need consider and apply the term usafety" to relicensing 2

FROM FAX NO.: Jun. 25 2003 01:40RM P3 rTfrlI :NW4C' BURTrON E . rAr No- a:, 3sa:3B .3 Aug. 234 01:3E4 P-proceedings With regard to current knowledge of the health effects from prolonged exposure to low loveleof ionizing radiaion.

12. Finally. It Ismy professional opinion that as Millstone Units 2 and 3 age, the risk of adverse health effects including heightened cancer incidences to the community will Increase because of economic Incentives on the part of the owner and operator to generate electricity at close to capacity and defer maintenance until scheduled refueling outages.

I hereby declare that the facts and statements set forth hereinabove are true to the best of my knowledge. information and belief under penalty of perjury.

yid 9, 2 Auganu, MB0A Dated: Auguat 0, 2004 3

RISKS OF CANCER AND OTHER DISEASES FROM THE OPERATION OF THE MILLSTONE NUCLEAR PLANT Joseph J. Mangano, MPH MBA National Coordinator Radiation and Public Health Project August 5, 2004 I am Joseph Mangano, National Coordinator of the Radiation and Public Health Project (RPHP), a non profit professional research organization based in New York City. I have served RPHP as a research associate from 1989-2000, and as National Coordinator ever since. My training includes a master's degree in public health from the University of North Carolina (1978) and a master's degree in business administration from Fordham University (1985). I have published 20 articles in professional medical journals on health risks of radiation, and am the author of Low-Level Radiation and Immune Damage: An Atomic Era Legacy (Lewis Publishers, 1998).

The information I am presenting here is taken from official government sources, which are documented. In addition, I am offering results from the study of radioactive Strontium-90 in baby teeth that RPHP has been conducting since 1998.

A summary of the findings on health risks from Millstone to the local population is as follows:

Risk of a Catastrophic Meltdown, and Health Consequences

- Millstone is among the oldest U.S. plants. Millstone Units 2 and 3 began operations in 1975 and 1986; the now-closed Millstone 1 operated from 1970 to 1995. No U.S.

reactor has ever operated more than 35 years, raising concerns about aging parts potentially failing and causing a meltdown.

- Before 1995, Millstone 2/3 operated 66% of the time, well below the U.S. average of 75%. Closings frequently occurred due to mechanical problems. Since January 1, 2001, the Millstone average rose to 91%, again raising the issue of whether aging parts are being pushed past their safe limits and risking a catastrophic meltdown.

The average time per reactor spent by federal regulators performing inspections fell 30% from 1996 to 2002.

- If the core of one of Millstone's two operating reactors were to experience a meltdown, it would cause at least 41,000 immediate deaths from and 48,000 immediate cases of acute radiation sickness, along with 71,000 eventual cancer deaths in the local area.

1

Radioactivity Routinely Produced

- Large amounts of highly radioactive waste have accumulated at Millstone, and any possibility of moving it permanently to Yucca Mountain, Nevada is at least seven years in the future, if ever.

- From 1970-93, Millstone emitted the 3rd greatest amounts of airborne radioactivity among the 72 operating U.S. plants. The total of about 32 curies is more than twice the amount emitted during the Three Mile Island accident, suggesting the local populations may be at an increased risk of cancer.

High and Rising Childhood and Adult Cancer Rates Near Millstone and Indian Point

- From the late 1960s to the late 1990s, the rate of cancer diagnosed in Connecticut children under age five rose 72%.

- In the period 1971-84 after the Millstone plant opened, cancer incidence and mortality age 0-19 in New London County rose 17% and 25% faster than the state rate.

- In these same 14 years, cancer incidence and mortality in New London county rose faster than the state for leukemia, female breast, thyroid, and bone/joint cancer, all of which are known to be sensitive to radiation. Excess breast cancer increases occurred for young, middle-aged, and elderly women.

- In the late 1990s, the highest rates of total cancers and breast cancer in New London County are in those towns closest to Millstone.

Improvements in Health After Millstone Shutdown In the winter of 1995-96, revelations of shoddy safety practices prompted the shutdown of the Connecticut Yankee and all three Millstone reactors. Connecticut Yankee and Millstone 1 were closed permanently, and Millstone 2/3 reopened in the summers of 1999 and 1998, respectively. During the period that no reactor operated in Connecticut (1996-97), various improvements in local health were observed:

- Mortality in infants under 1 year rate fell 18.1% in the five Connecticut and Rhode Island counties downwind from the reactors, dropping from 136 to 105 deaths.

- The death rate in children age 1-9 fell 39.1%, dropping from 25 to 15 deaths.

- While Millstone 2 and 3 operated part of the time in 1998-99, these mortality levels remained low. But they rose in 2000-01, when the reactors returned to full power.

Tooth Study Results Only 37 baby teeth have been collected from Connecticut, which is too few to draw conclusions from. However, preliminary results document several matters of concern:

2

1. Connecticut had an average Sr-90 level higher than each of the six other states that contributed at least 130 teeth; only Pennsylvania had an average equal to Connecticut.

2. From 1985-88 to 1993-96, average Sr-90 levels in Connecticut baby teeth more than doubled.

3. Average Sr-90 levels in 5 baby teeth from Connecticut children with cancer are nearly double that of teeth from children without cancer.

The above results suggest that current reactor emissions - not old fallout from Nevada bomb tests in the 1950s and 1960s - account-for a substantial proportion of radioactivity in the bodies of local children.

3

THREATS POSED BY NUCLEAR REACTORS TO CONNECTICUT Millstone Unit I in Waterford started up in 1970 and closed at the end of 1995).

Millstone Units 2 and 3 began operations in 1975 and 1986, respectively. The oldest U.S. reactor is Oyster Creek in New Jersey, which started in 1969.

A. Types of Reactor Emissions Posing Health Threats There are four types of public health risk posed by nuclear plants like Millstone:

1. Meltdown After Terrorist Attack.

Health concerns about nuclear reactors rose after September 11, 2001, especially those near large population centers. There has been a prolonged debate about the vulnerability of reactors to a terrorist strike, and the horrifying health consequences that would follow.

In 1982, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission estimated the casualties after a reactor core meltdown. (1) The estimates for Millstone 2/3 were 41,000 rapid deaths from radiation poisoning, 48,000 rapid cases of radiation poisoning and 71,000 eventual cancer deaths.

These figures should be seen as conservative because they only consider

- a core meltdown, not one in the waste pools where the majority of radioactivity exists

- persons only living within 30 miles of the reactor

- 1980 population figures, which have risen since Because Millstone is just 100 miles to the northeast of New York City, the most densely populated area in the U.S., and 75 miles southwest of Boston, particular concern should be raised about the threat of a terrorist attack against the plant.

2. Meltdown After Mechanical Failure.

A terrorist attack is not the only way in which a reactor meltdown can occur; mechanical failure is the other. The Chernobyl plant suffered a full meltdown of its core in 1986, while Three Mile Island Unit 2 in Pennsylvania experienced a partial meltdown in 1979, closing the reactor permanently. Both accidents were caused by mechanical failure, combined with human error.

Because Millstone 2/3 and many other reactors are aging, there is greater concern about parts being more likely to wear out, leak, or corrode. This concern was illustrated in March 2002 at the Davis-Besse plant near Toledo, OH.

Adding to the concerns of the mechanical failure is the recent tendency of plant operators to run aging reactors more of the time. From 1970-94, Millstone 2/3 operated just 66%

of the time (U.S. average 75%). Reactors were often closed for routine inspections and to repair mechanical failures. Since January 1, 2001, this "capacity factor" leaped to 91% at Millstone. (2) Aging parts being pushed to the maximum presents another risk of a malfunction and major meltdown.

Regulatory responsibility for nuclear plant safety lies with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). From 1996 to 2002, the average annual hours of NRC inspection 4

time per reactor tumbled 30%. (3) This is a troubling trend, especially given the advancing age of the reactors.

3. Waste Buildup.

Each nuclear plant accumulates highly radioactive waste, known as "spent fuel rods."

These resemble 10-foot long steel rods about the diameter of a pencil, containing high levels of radioactivity, and must be placed in 40 foot deep pools of constantly-cooled water. Millstone is running out of pool space, and will soon need to begin transferring some of the older rods to "dry cask" storage, or thick concrete-and-steel containers stored above-ground on the site. The U.S. government is planning to eventually store all waste at Yucca Mountain Nevada, but this plan is being contested in the courts, and the earliest possible date that waste transfers would begin is 2010. Whether the waste remains on site, or is transferred to Nevada, a successful terrorist attack or mechanical failure could cause a large-scale meltdown.

4. Routine Emissions.

While most radioactivity produced in reactors is contained in the building and stored as waste, a small proportion of this mix of 100-plus carcinogenic chemicals escapes through the stacks of the reactor, or must be deliberately released during periodic refueling.

These tiny particles and gases present a concern for public health, since it enters the human body by breathing or. through the food chain, after precipitation brings it to reservoirs, dairies, and other sources of food and water.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued comparative records on routine releases for all reactors until it ceased this publication in 1993. Prior to that time, Millstone had the 3 rd highest lifetime emissions of 72 operating U.S. plants. Emissions totaled over 32 curies, or 32 trillion picocuries (a measure of radioactivity) released into the air; this includes only chemicals with a half-life of more than eight days, or those most likely to enter the human body. This figure is more than two times greater than the official tally of 14 trillion emitted into the air at Three Mile Island during the 1979 accident. (4) 5

HIGH AND RISING CANCER RATES IN CONNECTICUT Evidence suggests that Millstone emissions may increase the risk of cancer in Connecticut residents living nearby.

A. Rising Childhood Cancer Incidence.

Children, especially fetuses and infants, are most susceptible to the damaging effects of radiation exposure. As a result, many medical journal articles have been published about childhood cancer rates near nuclear power plants. A number have found elevated rates among children near plants.

In Connecticut, rates of childhood cancer have been rising in recent decades. From 1967-69 (before Millstone 1 startup) until 1996-98, the statewide rate for children age 0-4 rose 72%, from 14.21 to 24.45 cases per 100,000 population. About 50 Connecticut children under age five receive a diagnosis of cancer each year. Even in the 1990s, when U.S. child cancer rates were generally steady, Connecticut rates continued to increase. Figure 1 illustrates this trend, and actual numbers are presented as Appendix I to this report.

B. Childhood Cancer Increases in New London County After Millstone Startup.

Excessively large increases in childhood cancer occurred in New London County, where Millstone is located. In 1990, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) published a large study of cancer rates near 62 U.S. nuclear plants before and after startup, including Millstone.

(5)

The NCI study showed that after Millstone opened in 1970, cancer incidence rates for children age 0-19 in New London County rose 17% faster than the Connecticut rate (Table 1). Put another way, the county rate was 12% below the state before startup, and 4% above after startup. The rate of cancer deaths among children in the counter rose 25% faster than the nation (Table 2), moving from 13% below to 9% above the U.S.

Table 1 Cancer Incidence, Age 0-19 New London County vs. Connecticut Before and After Startup of Millstone Plant County  % County is Cases Above/Below CT Age Before After Before After  % Change 0-9 111 84 - 2% +12% +14%

10-19 62 88 -25% - 4% +29%

TOT0-19 173 172 -12% + 4% +17%

Before= 1950-70; After= 1971-84 Source: National Cancer Institute, Cancer in Populations Living Near Nuclear Facilities, 1990.

6

Table 2 Cancer Mortality, Age 0-19 New London County vs. U.S.

Before and After Startup of Millstone Plant County  % County is Deaths Above/Below US Age Before After Before After  % Change 0-9 66 30 - 5% +13% +19%

10-19 32 33 -26% + 5% +42%

TOT 0-19 98 63 -13% + 9% +25%

Before= 1950-70; After= 1971-84 Source: National Cancer Institute, Cancer in Populations Living Near Nuclear Facilities, 1990.

A recent study showed that 14 of 14 areas near nuclear plants in the eastern U.S. had rates of childhood cancer age 0-9 above the U.S. rate during the 10-year period 1988-97, including Millstone. (6)

C. Radiosensitive Cancer Increases in New London County After Millstone Startup.

The New London cancer incidence rate also rose faster than the state rate in the first 14 years after Millstone startup for several types of cancer whose risk is known to be raised by radiation exposure. These include leukemia (rose +15% after the plant started up),

female breast cancer (+6%), thyroid cancer (+14%), and bone and joint cancer (+26%).

Persons of all ages are included in this comparison. The rate for all cancers combined rose 7% (Table 3).

The death rate for these cancers also rose more sharply in New London County than it did nationwide. The excess increases include leukemia (+9%), female breast cancer (+6%),

thyroid cancer (+86%), and bone and joint cancer (+26%). The death rate for all cancers combined rose 6% (Table 4).

7

Table 3 Cancer Incidence, Persons of All Ages Selected Radiosensitive Cancers New London County vs. Connecticut Before and After Startup of Millstone Plant County  % County is Cases Above/Below CT Cancer Before After Before After  % Change Leukemia 309 344 -14% - 1% +15%

(F) Breast 1311 1556 -11% - 6% + 6%

Thyroid 64 90 -31% - 21% +14%

Bone + Joint 31 32 -11% +12% +26%

All Cancer 10111 11331 - 8% - 2% + 7%

Before = 1950-70; After = 1971-84. Difference of borderline significance for leukemia (p<.07) and breast cancer (p<.07). Difference statistically significant for all cancers combined (p<.0001).

Source: National Cancer Institute, Cancer in Populations Living Near Nuclear Facilities, 1990.

Table 4 Cancer Mortality, Persons of All Ages Selected Radiosensitive Cancers New London County vs. U.S.

Before and After Startup of Millstone Plant County  % County is Deaths Above/Below US Cancer Before After Before After.  % Change Leukemia 246 222 -9% - 1% .+ 9%

(F) Breast 561 552 + 7% +13% + 6%

Thyroid 16 19 -27% +36% +86%

Bone + Joint 39 26 - 6% +18% +26%

All Cancer 6052 5992 + 5% +11% + 6%

Before = 1950-70; After = 1971-84. Difference of borderline significance for thyroid cancer (p<.08). Difference statistically significant for all cancers combined (p<.003).

Source: National Cancer Institute, Cancer in Populations Living Near Nuclear Facilities, 1990.

D. Breast Cancer Increases in New London Countv After Millstone Startup.

The NCI study also showed that New London County's excess increases in breast cancer incidence occurred in young women, middle-aged women, and elderly women. The excess county increases compared to the state include age 20-39 (rose +21% after the plant started up), age 40-59 (+7%), and age 60 and over (+4%/6), see Table 5.

Breast cancer mortality in the county (compared to the U.S.) declined for age 20-39 (-

22%), but rose for age 40-59 (+12%) and 60 and up (+5%), see Table 6.

8

Table 5 Female Breast Cancer Incidence, by Age at Diagnosis New London County vs. Connecticut Before and After Startup of Millstone Plant County  % County is Cases Above/Below CT Age Before After Before After  % Change 20-39

• 90 101 -23% - 7% +21%

40-59 548 595 - 14% - 8% + 7%

60+ 673 860 - 8% - 4% + 4%

All Ages 1311 1556 - 11% - 6% + 6%

Before = 1950-70; After = 1971-84. Difference of borderline significance for all ages (p<.0 7).

Source: National Cancer Institute, Cancer in Populations Living Near Nuclear Facilities, 1990.

Table 6 Female Breast Cancer Mortality, by Age at Death New London County vs. U.S.

Before and After Startup of Millstone Plant County  % County is Deaths Above/Below US Cancer Before After Before After  % Change 20-39 35 21 +28% + 0% - 22%

40-59 185 175 -11% + 2% +12%

60+ 341 356 +15% +20% + 5%

All Ages 561 552 + 7% +13% + 6%

Before = 1950-70; After = 1971-84 Source: National Cancer Institute, Cancer in Populations Living Near Nuclear Facilities, 1990.

E. Cancer Incidence in New London County Towns Closest to Reactors.

The Connecticut Tumor Registry has operated since 1935, the oldest of any state registry in the U.S. It has produced a variety of reports on cancer incidence, and some are now available on the state Department of Public Health's web site.

Some of these reports present cancer incidence for each town and city in the state. These data permit an analysis of cancer in towns closest to nuclear reactors to be made. Table 7 examines 1995-99 cancer incidence in the six New London County towns that lie closest to (under ten miles from) the Millstone reactor, compared to the remainder of the county.

The six towns account for just under half of the county's residents.

9

Table 7 documents that the 1995-99 cancer incidence rate in the six towns (East Lyme, Groton, Lyme, New London, Old Lyme, and Waterford) was 2.0% above the state rate.

The rate in other New London towns was 5.9% below the state rate. If the rates were equal in the two portions of New London County, 238 fewer persons in the six towns would have been diagnosed with cancer in 1995-99.

Table 7 Total Cancer Incidence, New London County vs. CT By Area of the County, 1995-99 Cases. 1995-99 Area of County Actual Expected*  % Above/Below CT Six Towns Nearest Millstone 3075 3014 + 2.0%

OtherNewLondon County 3577 3800 - 5.9%

e Expected cases if local rate were equal to state rate. Difference significant (p<.002); excess cases = 238. Towns closest to Millstone include East Lyme, Groton, Lyme, New London, Old Lyme, and Waterford Source: www.dph.state.ct.us F. Breast Cancer Incidence in New London County Towns Closest to Reactors.

The Connecticut Tumor Registry report also shows that 1995-99 female breast cancer incidence for the six New London County towns closest to the Millstone reactor was' equal to the state rate, while the rest of the county was 10.1% below the state. The excess number of breast cancer cases is 52 (Table 8).

Table 8 Female Breast Cancer Incidence New London County vs. CT By Area of the County, 1995-99 Cases, 1995-99 Area of County Actual Expected*  % Above/Below CT Six Towns Nearest Millstone 510 510 + 0.0%

Other New London County 484 538 - 10.1%

• Expected cases if local rate were equal to state rate. Excess cases = 52. Towns closest to Millstone include East Lyme, Groton, Lyme, Newv London, Old Lyme, and Waterford Source: www.dph.state.ct.us G. Improvements in Infant, Child Health During Reactor Closing.

During the winter of 1995-96, workers at the Millstone plant publicized numerous safety infractions at the plant. The story became widely reported, including a cover story in the March 7, 1996 Time magazine.

Northeast Utilities, which operated the Connecticut nuclear plants at the time, ceased power production the three Millstone reactors plus Connecticut Yankee. Millstone 1 and Connecticut Yankee were permanently closed. But before Millstone Units 2 and 3 were 10

restarted, the company invested over $1 billion in needed plant and managerial upgrades.

It also paid a $2 million fine to the NRC, a record for any U.S. nuclear plant.

Millstone 3 restarted in July 1998, after 2 1/2 years of closure, while Millstone 2 began operations in June 1999, after 3 1/2 years of closure. Thus, the percent of time Millstone's operated was approximately 10% in 1996-97, about 50% in 1998-99, and about 90% in 2000-01. These four years with limited plant operations, and less opportunity for routine and accidental emissions were studied to detect any immediate changes in disease rates for local residents. Infants and young children were selected, since it is the youngest humans who are most susceptible to radiation's harmful effects.

Table 9 shows the change in infant mortality rates (deaths under one year) in the five counties located within 40 miles and downwind (north and east) of Millstone. These include New London, Tolland, and Windham Counties in Connecticut, plus Kent and Washington Counties in Rhode Island. In 1996-97, when there were virtually no nuclear operations at Millstone, the infant death rate fell by 18.1%, falling from 136 to 105 deaths. The U.S. decline in those years was only 6.8%. In 1998-99, as Millstone 2 and 3 began operating, the rate declined just 3.1%. But in 2000-01, when the two reactors returned to full power, the rate jumped 8.8% from the previous two years.

Table 9 Infant Mortality (Death Rate Age 0-1)

Counties <40 Miles and Downwind of Millstone 1994-2001 Deaths per Period Deaths <1 Yr Live Births 1,000 Births % Ch.

1994-95 (80% operating factor) 136 18,361 7.41 1996-97 (10% operating factor) 105 17,292 6.07 -18.1%

1998-99 (50% operating factor) 100 17,010 5.88 - 3.1%

2000-01 (90% operating factor) 112 17,499 6.40 + 8.8%

Sources: National Center for Health Statistics (available from htt:f//wonder.cdc.Pov underlying cause of death). Bair FE. Weather of U.S. Cities, 4th Edition. Detroit: Gale Research Company Inc., 1992 (prevailing wind directions).

Counties include New London CT, Tolland CT, Windham CT, Kent RI, Washington RI.

Deaths in young children also followed this pattern. In 1994-95, there were 25 children age 1-9 in the five counties who died from all causes except accidents, suicide, and homicide. This number dropped to 15 in the next two years, when the Connecticut nuclear plants were closed, a rate decline of 39.1%. Thereafter, as Millstone gradually restarted operations, the number of deaths rose again, to 20 and 25 in subsequent two-year periods.

11

STUDY OF RADIOACTIVE STRONTIUM-90 IN BABY TEETH Since 1998, the Radiation and Public Health Project research group in New York has collected discarded baby teeth, and tested them for levels of radioactive Strontium-90, a chemical not found in nature, but only created in atomic bomb explosions and nuclear reactor operations. The group has tested over 4,000 teeth, mostly near seven U.S.

reactors, and found that Sr-90 levels rose sharply (48.5%) from the late 1980s to the late 1990s. Moreover, average Sr-90 levels are generally 30 to 50% higher in the counties closest to nuclear reactors. Results have been published in four separate medical journals. (7)

A total of 37 Connecticut teeth have been tested with available results (as of May 1, 2004), using the new counter. Of these, 31 were from persons born after 1979, in whom most of the in-body Sr-90 was from current sources, not leftover fallout from Nevada bomb tests. Thus, these 31 teeth will be the focus of this analysis. ALL OF THE FOLLOWING RESULTS MUST BE CONSIDERED PRELIMINARY, until more teeth are tested and the significance of the results is improved.

The major findings include:

1. Highest Average Sr-90 of All States. Six states (other than Connecticut) contributed at least 130 teeth. Of these, Connecticut's average of 4.29 picocuries of Sr-90 per gram of calcium at birth, was equaled only by Pennsylvania as the highest of all states thus far.

2. Higher Sr-90 in Children with Cancer. Five (5) of the 31 teeth were donated from Connecticut children with cancer. The Sr-90 average for these five teeth was 7.03, compared to 3.76 from other teeth, or 87% higher/nearly double.

3. Rising Levels in the 1990s. Connecticut children born 1985-88 had a Sr-90 average of 1.85 (five teeth). Those born in the next four years had an average of 3.61 (13 teeth); and those born 1993-96 had an average of 4.32 (six teeth), a rise of 134%,

(more than double) from the late 1980s to the mid-1990s.

4. Highest Levels Near Nuclear Plants. Those eight (8) tooth donors from Fairfield and New London Counties (near the Indian Point and Millstone plants) had an average Sr-90 concentration of 6.16, or 128% greater/more than double those from the other counties in Connecticut (2.70).

RPHP plans to collect and test more Connecticut teeth in the future.

12

APPENDIX 1 CANCER INCIDENCE, AGE 0-4 CONNECTICUT, 1967-1998 Cases/I 00,000 Pop.

Year Dx Cases Population Annual 3 Yr. 3 Yr. Cases 1967 43 268344 16.02 15.15 124 1968 30 262708 11.42 14.42 116 1969 39 257014 15.17 14.21 112 1970 47 252187 18.64 15.03 116 1971 51 248355 20.54 18.08 137 1972 38 239964 15.84 18.37 136 1973 36 229954 15.66 17.40 125 1974 34 216746 15.69 15.73 108 1975 .38 203959 18.63 16.60 108 1976 42 190358 22.06 18.66 114 1977 27 184367 14.64 18.49 107 1978 47 183430 25.62 20.78 116 1979 28 184561 15.17 18.47 102 1980 28 186933 14.98 18.56 103 1981 31 190795 16.25 15.47 87 1982 33 193516 17.05 16.11 92 1983 42 198071 21.20 18.20 106 1984 51 201496 25.31 21.24 126 1985 41 207209 19.79 22.08 134 1986 44 212960 20.66 21.88 136 1987 60 219354 27.35 22.67 145 1988 50 225536 22.17 23.41 154 1989 48 232465 20.65 23.33 158 1990 34 234142 14.52 19.07 132 1991 48 236945 20.26 18.48 130 1992 52 237137 21.93 18.92 134 1993 56 236362 23.69 21.96 156 1994 41 232542 17.63 21.10 149 1995 43 223223 19.26 20.23 140 1996 63 221449 28.45 21.71 147 1997 52 215576 24.12 23.93 158 1998 44 213177 20.64 24.45 159 13

REFERENCES:

1. Sandia National Laboratories. Consequences of a Reactor Accident (CRAC-2)

Report. Published by Congress on November 1, 1982, and printed by the Washington Post that day. Also available at http://www.geocities.comI/mothersalert/crac.html.

2. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Nuclear Energy Institute. In The New York Times, October 2, 1995, p. B1 (1970-94 data). U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, found at http://www.nrc.gov in April 2001 (1995-99 data).

3. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, in The Philadelphia Inquirer, March 28, 2004.

4. Tichler J, Doty K, Lucademo K. Radioactive Materials Released from Nuclear Power Plants, annual reports. Upton NY: Prepared by Brookhaven National Laboratory for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Pub. No. NUREG/CR-2907.

5. Jablon S, Hrubec, Z, Boice JD, Stone BJ. Cancer in Populations Living Near Nuclear Facilities. National Cancer Institute, NIH Pub. No.90-874. Washington DC: U.S.

Government Printing Office, 1990.

6. Mangano JJ et al. Elevated Childhood Cancer Incidence Proximate to U.S. Nuclear Power Plants. Archives of Environmental Health 2003;58(2):74-82.

7. Mangano JJ et al. An Unexpected Rise in Strontium-90 in US Deciduous Teeth in the 1990s. The Science of the Total Environment 2003;317:37-51.

14

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of DOMINION NUCLEAR CONNECTICUT, INC. :Docket Nos. 50-336-LR, 50-423-LR (Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3) :ASLBP No. 04-824-01-LR AFFIDAVIT OF CYNTHIA M. BESADE I, Cynthia M. Besade, do hereby declare as follows:

1. I am above the age of eighteen (18) years and I believe in the obligation of an oath.

2. From the age of three to age twenty (1963-1979), I resided with my family at 21 Fifth Avenue in Waterford, Connecticut, a location which is within two miles of the Millstone Nuclear Power Station.

3. My father, Joseph H. Besade, was employed at the Millstone Nuclear Power Station from 1973 until 1993 as a nuclear pipefitter.

4. Insuch capacity, my father was exposed at the Millstone Nuclear Power Plant workplace to ionizing radiation created as a byproduct of nuclear fission at the facility.

5. On or about May 2003, my father was diagnosed with cancer.

6. From May 2003 until August 2003, my father underwent treatment for his cancer.

7. Despite such treatment, my father's cancer spread rapidly and on August

.16, 2003, my father succumbed to the disease.

8. My father's treating physician, who was affiliated with the New London 1

Cancer Center and the Lawrence & Memorial Hospital, told me in August 2003 that she believed that what my father had related to her as follows was correct:

a. That my father's cancer was directly related to his workplace exposure at Millstone;

b. That my father was exposed to high levels of radioactivity in certain areas of the facility; and

c. That the protective clothing and lead blankets issued to workers, including my father, to prevent harm to their health from exposure to radiation were inadequate to the purpose.

9. I have been personally acquainted with many of my father's former co-workers at Millstone.

10.1 am aware that seven (7) of his nuclear pipefitter co-workers succumbed to cancer before he became the eighth.

11 .When I was growing up in Waterford, I recall promoters of the Millstone Nuclear Power Station providing assurances to the community that the facility would be safe and that it would provide cheap, clean and non-polluting electricity.

Each of these representations has proved to be false.

12.1 have been personally acquainted with many families living in the Waterford, East Lyme and Niantic and surrounding communities.

13.1 have been personally acquainted with many individuals who have worked at Millstone and/or resided in the community surrounding Millstone who have died from cancer and cancer-related illnesses.

14. I have been personally acquainted with many individuals who have 2

08/15/2004 07:16 FAX 8608484114 RAD8OVSKI-DELI-MART e 001/001 worked at Millstone and/or resided Inthe community surrounding Millstone who have been diagnosed with cancer, have undergone treatment for cancer and presently survive.

15. I am also Indirectly acquainted with individuals who have worked at Millstone and/or resided in the community surrounding Millstone who have died from cancer and cancer-related illnesses or who have undergone treatment for cancer and presently survive.

16.1 attach hereto a list of the Individuals referenced above in paragraphs 13, 14 and 15. (Other than my father, the names of all others are not being revealed here although their identities are retained by me).

I hereby swear that the Information provided herein is true to the best of my knowledge, Information and belief under penalty of perjury.

0' y nd-Cynthia M. Besade Dated: August 9, 2004 3

Millstone Community Cancer Victims Personall Known

1. Joseph H. Besade Fifth Ave. Waterford Millstone worker/community' Metastatic Lung Cancer Deceased/Aug. 16, 2003 Age 66

2. Male Daniels Ave. Waterford community Brain cancer Deceased/ 1980?

Age 50?

3. Male Third Ave. Waterford Millstone worker/community Brain cancer Deceased/year?

Age 35?

4. Male / Fifth Ave. Waterford community Age 65 diagnosed w/Lung cancer/ survivor ....... 2003 Fall Diagnosed w/ Brain Cancer /survivor

5. Male/Doctor practice was located on Main St. Niantic community/1 970' &80's Blood cancer/unknown type status unknown/ 1996?1997?

Age 70?

6. Male Flanders Road/Rt. 161 Niantic community Throat cancer Deceased/ June 22, 2003 Age 72

7. Male Roxbury Road Niantic community/parent of #8.

Metastatic Liver cancer Deceased/ 1979?

Age 60?

8. Male Roxbury Road Niantic 20 yr. Millstone worker/community Brain tumor diagnosed 1986/29 years of age then. Survivor/disabled Current age 48 (Note: this begins the NU Unit 1maintenance dept. (personnel who handled contaminated waste) where three people developed brain cancer within the same timeframe. NU abruptly closed this department and dismissed the employees in Jan. 1994) NU had them to sign off to not file suit against them (NU offered and paid $ for sign off) to #8, 9, + 10

9. Male unknown address Millstone worker/community Brain cancer Deceased / 1998?

Age between 30 and 40 4

10. Female Shennecossett Road Groton Millstone worker/community Brain cancer/diagnosed 1985 Deceased/1997

11. Female Miss Vans Court Waterford Community Leukemia Deceased/1995 Age 56

12. Male Tenth Ave. Waterford Community Blood cancer/Type? Deceased/1976?

Age 18

13. Male Willets Ave. Waterford Community Brain cancer Deceased/1982 Age 30?

14. Male Oswegatchie Hills Road Niantic Millstone worker/community cancer? unknown type Deceased/2000 Age 70?

15. Male Niantic River Road Waterford community Brain Cancer Deceased/1981 Age 45? Taught Science at Waterford High

16. Male Niles Hill Road Waterford Millstone carpenter worker/community Lymphoma Survivor Age 30 something @ diagnosis 1997?

17. Male Monroe Street Waterford community Lymphoma Deceased/1986? 1987?

Age 50 something

18. Female Monroe Street Waterford community Lymphoma Deceased/1986? 1987?

Age unknown #18's mother-in-law

19. Female/child Mullen Hill Road Waterford community/father was Millstone worker Bone cancer Leg amputated/i 971 or so? Survivor Age 11 ? (attended Southwest School) 20.. Male/teen unknown address/Sunset Dr. Waterford Tumors in Spinal column Deceased /1985 Age 19 (attended Southwest School)

21. Male Tiffany Ave. Waterford community pancreatic/liver cancer? Not real 5

sure though Deceased /1987 Age 48?/50?

22. Female Lloyd Road Waterford community Liver cancer Deceased /1980 Age 25?

23. Male Shore Road Waterford community Liver cancer? Deceased /1977 Age 50 something? (Parent to #25)

24. Male Shore Road Waterford Millstone carpenter worker/community Brain cancer (son of #24) Deceased / Jan. 1987 Age 31

25. Female (mother of # 24) Roselund Hill Uncasville community(summered on Jordan Cove)w/24&25 Brain cancer Deceased/I 986 Age 70?

26. Male child Fifth Ave Waterford community leukemia Status unknown Age of diagnosis 2 or 3 years

27. Female child Fifth Ave Waterford community spinal tumors (attended Southwest School) Deceased / 1975?

28. Female Shore Road Waterford community Breast Cancer/Double mastectomy Survivor Age: 25?

29. Female 15 Lamphere Road Waterford community Leukemia Deceased / 1979? 1980?

Age 18?

30. Male/ Vauxhall Steet ext. Waterford community Lung cancer/deceased/2000 Age 65?

31. Female/ unknown location Wtfd./NL community Breast cancer/ relative of above #33 Deceased/ 2001 Age unknown ? 60

32. Female/ Niantic community Breast cancer/ Deceased/ 2000? Or 1999?

6

Age 70?

33. Male/ Great Neck Road, Waterford community/ nursery farmer Cancer origin unkown? Deceased July 2004 Age 71

34. Male/ George Street Waterford/ then Spithead Road where he died this spring 2004/ Seaside Regional DMR/Director of Camp Harkness Age 54

35. Female/ Spithead Road Waterford community Age 65? Breast cancer /

survivor 36.

37. Male/ husband of # 35 Age 65? (Both relocated to Florida, both were recently diagnosed) Lymphoma

37. Female/ The Strand, Waterford community Breast cancer/ 1970's or early 80's survivor (another relocated to Florida)

38. Female/ a street off Oswegatchie Road, Waterford community Age 40? Breast Cancer/ Deceased 1985 or so?

39. Female/ Niantic River Road Waterford community/ worked in downtown Niantic Age 50? Breast Cancer Deceased/1998?

40. Female/teen 17 at onset Rope Ferry Road, Waterford community/student Bone cancer/leg amputated 1979? Survivor

41. Male/ Logger Hill/Rope Ferry Road Waterford/ then Niantic community Age 60? Lung Cancer / Deceased 2000

42. Male/ Quaker Hill Waterford Lung Cancer/ Age 58? Deceased 1990?

43.. Male/ Clark Lane Waterford community Age 45 ...diagnosed w/leukemia age 30 something survivor 44.. Male/Clark Lane Waterford community Age unkown maybe 50 something ..... Father to # 45. Deceased I lateI980's/early 90's Cancer type unknown 45.. Female/ Dainels Avenue Waterford community (same family as listed in

1. 40.)

Breast Cancer/ Deceased 2003 7

46.. Female/ Niantic River Road Waterford community Cancer type can't remember ..... Deceased 1980's Mother in law to the #

49

47. Female/ Niantic River Road (NOT THE SAME HOUSE BUT THE SAME FAMILY)

Breast Cancer real aggressive type inflammatory 1990 survivor Age 35?

48. Female/ Gallup Lane Waterford -community Breast cancer 1975 Deceased same yr.

Age 35?

49.. Female/ Oswegatchie Waterford community Breast cancer 1974 1975? Deceased same yr.

Age 35?

50. Female Gay Hill Road Uncasville community pancreatic cancer Deceased/ 1982?

Age 60?

51. Female (mother of# 24) Roselund Hill Uncasville community Brain cancer Deceased/1986 Age 70?

Indirectly Acquainted

52. Female Seabreeze Drive, Waterford Breast Cancer, Deceased 2003 Age 83

53. Male, Seabreeze Drive, Waterford Colon Cancer, Deceased 2001

54. Male, Seabreeze Drive, Waterford Liver cancer Deceased 2003

55. Female, Seabreeze Drive, Waterford Breast Cancer 2000 survivor

56. Female Crescent Beach, East Lyme Age 10 at exposure, now 26 Thyroid Cancer survivor

57. Female Niantic Thyroid Cancer 2000 (?)

58. Female Niantic Breast Cancer 2000 (?)

8

58. Female Groton Long Point Breast cancer 1999 survivor

59. Female Shore Road, Waterford Cancer of unknown origin survivor

60. Female Waterford Ovarian cancer, high school sophomore, survivor

61. Female Mystic Breast cancer, 50s, survivor

62. Female Mystic Age 3 Cancer of unknown type

63. Male Niantic Brain cancer 2000 (?)

64. Female Niantic Brain cancer 1996(?)

65. Male Waterford School age, childhood leukemia 2003

66. Niantic - Cluster of cancer cases on Bluff during 1990s

67. Female Black Point, Niantic Cancer of unknown type 2003(?)

9

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of DOMINION NUCLEAR CONNECTICUT, INC. :Docket Nos. 50-336-LR, 50-423-LR (Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3)  : ASLBP No. 04-824-01-LR AFFIDAVIT OF MICHAEL N. STEINBERG I, Michael Steinberg do hereby declare as follows:

1. I am above the age of eighteen (18) years and I believe in the obligation of an oath.

2. From 1961 until 1975, my sister, Lisa Steinberg, resided with my parents, Louis and Margaret Steinberg, at 9 Surrey Lane in Niantic, Connecticut.

3. Our former home at 9 Surrey Lane is located within three miles downwind of the Millstone Nuclear Power Station.

4. On or about 1990, my sister was diagnosed with thyroid cancer.

5. My sister underwent treatment for her cancer, including surgical removal of her thyroid gland.

6. My sister endured great pain and suffering during her struggle with cancer.

7. Because of the surgical removal of her thyroid gland, my sister has to take medication every day to perform the functions formerly performed by her thyroid gland, and must be checked regularly for cancer.

A.

9. 1am personally aware of six cancer cases in the east downtown Niantic, Connecticut neighborhood, as follows:

a. Lung cancer: 2 (fatal)

b. Liver cancer: 1 (fatal)

c. Leukemia: 1 (fatal)

d. Bone cancer 1 (fatal)

e. Pancreatic cancer 1 (non-fatal)

I hereby declare that the foregoing facts are true to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, under penalty of perjury.

Michael N. Steinberg Dated: August 7, 2002

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of DOMINION NUCLEAR CONNECTICUT, INC. :Docket Nos. 50-336-LR, 50-423-LR (Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3) :ASLBP No. 04-824-01-LR AFFIDAVIT OF MILTON C. BURTON I, Milton C. Burton, do hereby declare as follows:

1. I am above the age of eighteen (18) years and I believe in the obligation of an oath.

2. I resided from approximately 1988 until 2003 with my wife, June K. Burton, at 32 Seabreeze Drive in Waterford, Connecticut.

3. 32 Seabreeze Drive is located two miles downwind of the Millstone Nuclear Power Station.

4. While we resided at 32 Seabreeze Drive, my wife spent a great deal of time out-of-doors, particularly tending to her gardens and flowers.

5. My wife was expose to effluent paths of radioactive effluent emissions emanating from the Millstone Nuclear Power Station while she resided at 32 Seabreeze Drive.

6. In 2002, my wife was diagnosed with a rare form of breast cancer.

7. Thereafter, my wife endured extensive cancer therapy.

8. While my wife was hospitalized, our family was told by a member of the hospital staff that upon her personal knowledge the management of the Millstone Nuclear Power Station is aware of a heightened cancer incidence in the I

community surrounding Millstone and is aware of the cads&-and-effect connection between Millstone radioactive effluent emissions and cancer incidences.

9. Our family has recently spoken to my wife's treating physician about our concerns that the Millstone Nuclear Power Station radioactive effluent emissions are responsible in part for the heightened incidence of cancers and related diseases in the community surrounding Millstone and the treating physician stated that she agreed with such assessment.

10. On March 22, 2003, my wife succumbed to breast cancer.

I declare that the above facts and statements are true to the best of my knowledge, information and belief under penalty of perjury.

Milton C. Burton Dated: August 9, 2004 2

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of DOMINION NUCLEAR CONNECTICUT, INC. :Docket Nos. 50-336-LR, 60-423-LR (Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3) :ASLBP No. 04-824-01-LR AFFIDAVIT OF CAROL WARD 1,Carol Ward, do hereby declare as follows:

1. I am above the age of eighteen (18) years and I believe in the obligation of an oath.

2. From 1976 until 2001, I resided with my husband, Edward J. Ward, at 34 Seabreeze Drive in Waterford, Conneticut.

3. In 1993, my husband was diagnosed with colon cancer.

4. My husband underwent extensive radiation and chemotherapy.

5. On April 10, 2001, my husband succumbed to the disease.

6. The Seabreeze Drive neighborhood where we resided in Waterford is located approximately two miles downwind from the Millstone Nuclear Power Station.

7. Our next-door neighbor died of breast cancer in 2003.

8. Our neighbor across the street died of liver cancer in 2003.

9. A nearby neighbor died of ovarian cancer in 2001.

10. Other neighbors have recently been diagnosed with lymphoma, breast cancer and childhood leukemia.

I hereby declare the foregoing statements are true to the best of my knowledge, Information ard belief, under penalty of pedury.

Cardl Wrd Dated: August 9, 2004

Bureau of Water Management

^ Permitting, Enforcement & Remedlation Division Office of the Director, Michael J. Harder Telephone 42443705 Intercom 2173 Fax 424-4057 TRANSMITTAL SLIP Date: I /2) /2P I CS'ARTIRY THAi THIS DOCUMEN2T PROGRAM: es'1 6: .ISA TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL.

Please forward to NAME~

O-Arlhur J.Rocque, Jr. cl4nne K. Stahl MRobcrt L. Smith 0 DEPARTMENT OF E.'sVIRON1.T.NTAL PROTECTION, 13UREAU OF WATER For: P-Sifnature O Approval HANAGE~ENT

SUBJECT:

/ /  ; Z /.(

,7e -~

Name of Person, Company. Corporation O Consent Order O Order O Civil Referml O Criminal Referral O Permit O Correspondnccy O Log Lecner _; e tv a/~Or 1/E '* f / .'41x /-

Date of Sign-Off Review Reviewer Signature Staff I3/4%/?rf Staff 2

(2- c - '5 Supervisor Legal Review 2 > ...

~;5 Assistant Director ,.

Director Bureau Chief J ?/2 i' Assistant Commissioner . t rf>

RETURN TO C ,, Z-,, __ - L Comments: CL.I, S. h er a r h..,, CJ "C 7 .,.llrI DO- I 3 /1 Commissioner Log It:

X " 66' ..S-64t

'4I"PLAINT1F1 EXHBI-J( U n .,41'p- 1.k-no. - . .....

Ti

a944

• Court Qualified Question Document Examine HandwritingExpert Cas Ientfi J. Rcq!eeeJr. *

.dation:-Athur 4.-

CaseSubmitted by: NancyeBurton 147 CrossHighway Redding Ridge, CT 068 76 Submitted Date: June 28,2003 Objective: Identifyn writer of four lines ofpiintscript in lowerJleft of Transmittal Slip dated 12/20/99.

"Questioned" Document: Department of Enviroinmental Protection.r Transmittal Slip dated 12/20/99.

"Known" Documents: (1) State of Connecticut Dept. ofEnvironmental Protection, Emergency Authorization, signed by Arthur. J. Rocque, Jr., dated October 23, 1998, (2) Emergency Authorization Modification, dated January 8, 1999, (3) Two Emergency Authorization Renewals, dated December 28, 1999, and (4) May 12,2000.

OPINION: My examination finds extreme similarities in slant, proportion, spacing, stroke structure, connections and skill, therefore it is my opinion that the hand that wrote the "Known" documents also wrote the "Questioned" document.

Bonnie Lee Nugent

.Document Examiner 399 Zoar Road. Rowe, A 01367 (413) 3394308 blee@crocker.com

, .STATE OF CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION EMERGENCY AUTHORIZATION Pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes (C.G.S.) 22a-6k, an Emergency Authorization is hereby issued to:

Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (NNECO)

Post Office Box 128 Waterford, CT 06385-0128 7 to initiate, create, originate or maintain a discharge to the waters of the state (Long Island Sound) at:

Niantic Bay via Discharges Permitted UnderNPDES Permit No. CT0003263, and Other Locations Authorized Herein Associated with Cooling Water Intakes, Fire Protection Systems and Plant Maintenance Systems at Millstone Nuclear Power Station Units 1, 2 and 3 Rope Ferry Road Waterford, CT 06385-0128 II. This Emergency Authorization CAuthorization') specifically allows NNECO to:

(1) Discharge Unit 2 and 3 chlorinated and non-chlorinated pump lubrication water and pump leak off water to existing cooling water intake structures and existing discharge locations; (2) Discharge Unit 2 and 3 service water and circulating water strainer backwash wastewater and screenwash wastewater, (3) Increase the total maximum daily flow for Millstone Unit 3 from 1,313,200,000 gallons per day (gpd) to 1,410,600,000 gpd (as specified in-Table 1.on page 6 of correspondence D12024 referenced in section V. of this Authorization) dated February 6, 1998 to David Cherico from F.C.

Rothtn_.

(4) Discharge incidental concentrations of ethanolamine (ETA) resulting from the previously -

authorized additions of ETA to Unit 3 feedwater and condensate systems. These incidental discharges (as described in Letter D 12418) of ETA shall be authorized to DSN 001 C via DSNs OOIC-2, 00IC-3j 001C-4, OO1C-6(b), and 001C-9 ofNPDES Permit CT0003263, issued December 14, 1992; (5) In the event of automatic plant shutdown, or other emergency situation, discharge condenser hotwell wastewater on a continuous basis via DSN 601C-8 of NPDES Permit CT0003263. NNECO shall notify the Commissioner, in writing, within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> after such discharge commences; (6) Discharge incidental non-radioactive wastewaters from numerous intermittent sources from Units 2 and 3 (as described in Letter D12938) to DSN 006 of NPDES Permit CT0003263, issued December 14, 1992; (7) Discharge incidental concentrations of ethanolamine (ETA) and hydrazine resulting from the previously authorized additions of ETA and hydrazine within secondary units at Units 2 and 3.

These incidental discharges (as described in Letter D12938) of ETA and hydrazine shall be authorized to DSN 006 of NPDES Permit CT0003263; (8) In the event of automatic plant shutdown, or other emergency situation, discharge Unit 3 Printed on Recycled Paper) 79 Elm Street

• Hartford. CT 06106 - 5127 EXHIBIT M http://dep.state.ct.us Empl o-CVa -° R . ~~~AnEqual Opportunity Employer aa>t9-

( =80H2000

I. e I condensate surge tank wastewater to DSN 006 of NPDES Permit CT0003263. NNECO shall notify the Commissioner, in writing, within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> after such discharge commences; (9) Discharge wastewater treated for hydrazine removal through air sparging and/or hydrogen peroxide addition from the Unit 2 Condensate Polishing Unit (DSN OOIB-6). Such wastewaters may also contain residual concentrations of amnmonia, hydrogen peroxide and ETA; (10) Discharge wastewater containing hydrazine resulting from previously authorized additions of hydrazine to Unit 2 feedwater systems via DSN OO lB-I during start-up, hot stand-by and shutdown conditions; (11) Discharge Unit 1 service water strainer backwash to DSN 002 of NPDES Permit number CT0003263; (12) Discharge chlorinated and non-chlorinated intake pump seal water from Unit I service water, circulating water, and screenwash pumps to the existing cooling water intake structure and existing discharge locations; (13) Discharge fire water system wastewaters (as documented InLetter D1329), including:

(a) Fire pump.(P-82) gland run off water to DSN 009 of CT0003263 or to the ground; (b) Pressure relief valve discharge from fire pump (M7-8) to a trap rock dispersion area; (c) Fire pump (M7-8) gland run off to'DSN 009 of CT0003263; (d) Diesel powered fire pump (M7-7) cooling water and relief valve discharges to DSN 009 of CT0003263; (e) Fire pump (M7-7) gland run off water to pump house floor drains; (14) Redirect the discharge of Unit 1 and Unit 2 chemistry laboratory wastewaters (as documented in Letter D15453) from DSN OOIA-2 to DSN OO1B-2..

(15) Increase the maximum daily flow from DSN OOIB of NPDES Permit No. CT0003263 to 844,550,000 gallons per day, (16) Increase the maximum daily flow from DSN OOlB-5 of NPDES Permit No. CT0003263 to 51,840,000 gallons per day; (17) Convert the primary source of Unit 2 circulating water pump lubrication water from chlorinated domestic water to plant service water. Chlorinated domestic water may remain available to use as a backup source of water supply; (18) Discharge incidental concentrations of ethanolamine (ETA) and hydrazine from Units 1 and 2 resulting from the previously authorized additions of ETA and hydrazine within secondary units at Units 2 and 3. These incidental discharges (as descnbed in Letter D15084) of ETA and hydrazine shall be authorized to DSN 001 of NPDES Permit CT0003263.

Ill. This Emergency Authorization shall become effective on the date it is issued, and shall expire upon a final determination on NNECO's application for reissuance of NPDES Permit No. CT0003263 or upon the Commissioner's determination that the requirements of Section 22a-6k of the Connecticut General Statutes are no longr applicable to the activities authorized herein, whichever is sooner. NNECO shall update the 2

4.

STATE OF CONNECTICUT

• DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION EMERGENCY AUTHORIZATION

1. ' Pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes (C.G.S.) 22a-6k, an Emergency Authorization is hereby issued to:.

Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (NNECO)

Post Office Box 128 Waterford, CT 06385-0128.

to Initiate, create, originate or maintain a discharge to the waters of the state (Long Island Sound) at:

Niantic Bay via Discharges Permitted Under NPDES Permit No. CT0003263, and Other Locations Authorized Herein Associated with Cooling Water Intakes, Fire Protection Systems and Plant Maintenance Systems at Millstone Nuclear Power Station Units 1, 2 and 3 Rope Ferry Road Waterford, CT 06385-0128 II. This Emergency Authorization CRAuthorization') specifically allows NNECO to:

(1) Discharge Unit 2 and 3 chlorinated and non-chlorinated pump lubrication water and pump leak off water to existing cooling water intake structures and existing discharge locations; (2) Discharge Unit 2 and 3 service water and'circulating water strainer backwash wastewater and screenwash wastewater, (3) Increase the total maxinum daily flow for Mill 3m 111 3200-000 gallons per day (gpd),to 1,410,600.000 gpi (ire pecified in Table 1 on page 6 of correspondence D12024 reterenced in section V. of this Authorization) dated February 6, 1998 to David Cherico from F.C.

Rothtn;,

(4) Dischargeincidental concentrations of ethanolamieom the reviousl auhored oadditins of ETA to Unit 3 feedwater and condensate systems. These incidental discharges'(as described in LetterD 12418) of ETA shall be authorized to DSN OOIC'via DSNs 001C-2, OOIC-3, OOIC-4, 001C-6(b), and OOIC-9 of NPDES Permit CTl003263, issued December 14, 1992;

- (5) 'In the event ofautomatic plant shutdown, or other emergency situation, discharge condenser hotwell wastewater on a continuous basis via DSN 00IC-8 of NPDES Permit C&0003263. NNECO shall notify the Commissioner, in writing, within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> after such discharge commences; (6) Discharge incidental non-radioactive wastewaters from numerous intermittent sources from Units 2 and 3 (as described in Letter D12938) to DSN 006 of NPDES Permit CT0003263, issued December 14, 1992; (7) Discharge incidental concentrations of ethanolarnine (ETA) and hydrazine resulting from'the previously authn e within secondary units at Units 2 anM3.

These incidental discharges (as described in Letter D12938) of ETA and hydrazine shall be' authorized to DSN 006 of NPDES Permit CT0003263; (8) In the event of automatic plant shutdown, or other emergency situation, discharge Unit 3

( Printed on Recycled Paper) - ANIF 79 Elm Street

• Hartford. CT 06106-5127 EXHIBIT S hutp://dep-statexct-us ,o 1<>U -a 0100AX An Equal Opportunity Employer elbaigConnctcu Cosaleou. Ma eei 18 20

• C condensate surge tank wastewater to DSN 006 of NPDES Permit CT0003263. NNECO shall notify the Commissioner, in writing, within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> after such discharge commences; (9) Discharge wastewater treated for hydrazine removal through air sparging and/or hydrogen peroxide addition from the Unit 2 Condensate Polishing Unit (DSN OO1B-6). Such wastewaters may also contain residual concentrations of ammonia, hydrogen peroxide and ETA; (10) Discharge wastewater containing hydrazine resulting from previously authorized additions of hydrazine to Unit 2 feedwater systems via DSN 001lB-i during start-up, hot stand-by and shutdown conditions; -

(11) Discharge Unit I service water strainer backwash to DSN 002 of NPDES Permit number CT0003263; (12) Discharge chlorinated and non-chlorinated intake pump seal water from Unit I service water, circulating water, and screenwash pumps to the existing cooling water intake structure and existing discharge locations; (13) Discharge fire water system wastewaters (as documented in Letter D1329), including:

(a) Fire pump.(P-82) gland run off water to DSN 009 of CT0003263 or to the ground;

• (b) Pressure relief valve discharge from fire pump (M7-8) to a trap rock dispersion area; (c) Fire pump (M7-8) gland nn off to DSN 009 of CT0003263; (d) Diesel powered fire pump (M7-7) cooling water and relief valve discharges to DSN 009 of CT0003263; (e) Fire pump (M7-7) gland run offwater to pump house floor drains; (14) Redirect the discharge of Unit 1 and Unit 2 chemistry laboratory wastewaters (as documented in Letter D15453) from DSN OO1A-2 to DSN OO1B-2.

(15) Increase the maximum daily flow from DSN OO1B of NPDES Permit No. CT0003263 to 844,550,000 gallons per day, (16) Increase the maximum daily flow from DSN OOIB-5 of NPDES PermitNo. CT0003263 to 5 1,840,000 gallons per day; (17) Convert the primary source of Unit 2 circulating water pump lubrication water from chlorinated domestic water to plant service water. Chlorinated domestic water may remain available to use as a backup source of water supply; (18) Discharge incidental concentrations of ethanolamine (ETA) ond hydrazine from Units 1 and 2 resulting from the raklou aWL e dt _within o ETA and secondary units at Units 2 and 3. These incidental discharges (as described in Letter D15084) of ETA and hyc-azine shall be authorized to DSN 001 ofNPDES Permit Crl003263.

Ill. This Emergency Authorization shall become effective on the date it is issued, and shall expire upon a final determination on NNECO's application for reissuance of NPDES Permit No. CM0003263 or upon the Commissioner's determination that the requirements of Section 22a-6k of the Connecticut General Statutes

-are no er aic tothd Ion hr fein, whichever is sooner. NNECO shall update the 2

documented need for this Emergency Authorization as requested. Upon issuance of this Authorization, Emergency Authorizations EA0100128S issued on December 28, 1999, EA0100133RS issued on May 12, 2000, EA0100142R issued on October 29, 1999 and EA0100143R issued on October 3, 1999 shall expire and no longer be in effect.

IV. The fee of SSOO.00 has been submitted for issuance of this Authorization.

V. This Authorization has been issued based on information contained in various submittals, including but not limited to the following:

1. . Letter D 11848 from D. Amerine to J. Grier received December22, 1997;

2. Letter D00362 from S; Scace to J. Grier dated August 11, 1997;

3. Letter D11528 from S. Scace toM. Harder dated September24, 1997;

4. Letter from M. Harder to S. Scace dated October 1, 1997;

5. Letter DI 1681 from DAB. Amerine to M. Harder Dated November 5, 1997;

6. Letter D12024 from F.C. Rothen to David Cherico dated February 6, 1998;

7. Letter dated August 13, 1997 from M. Harder to S. Scace;

8. Letter D10304, dated October 4, 1996 from S. Scace to M. DiNoia;

9. Letter D12418 request for Emergency Authorization Millstone Unit 3 from Dennis Welch to James Grier received April 29, 1998.

10. Numerous correspondences from Northeast Nuclear Energy Company to DEP as referenced in Letter (D13038) from Paul M. Jacobson to James Grier dated September 1, 1998 and all documents referenced therein;

11. Correspondence-D13275 dated September 15, 1998 from P. Jacobson to M. Harder and all documents referenced therein;

12. Correspondences D13239 and D13i64 from Paul M. Jacobson to James Grier dated September 22, 1998 and August 26, 1998 respectively, and all documents referenced therein;

13. Correspondence D15453 from Paul Jacobson to James Grier dated February 3, 2000 and all documents referenced therein.

14. Millstone Nuclear Power Station Technical Specification Manuals for Units 1, 2, and 3.

15. Correspondence D16432 dated October 2, 2000 from Paul M. Jacobson to James Grier and all documents referenced therein.

VI. 1. DEFINITIONS The definitions of terms used in this Authorization shall be the same as the definitions contained in C.G.S. section 22a423, and section 22a-430-3(a) of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies.

3

Any person who, or municipality which initiates, creates, originates, or maintains a discharge for which an authorization is issued must comply with that authorization. If the source or activity generating the discharge for which an authorization is issued is owned by one person or municipality but is leased or in some other way the legal responsibility of another person or municipality (the discharger), the discharger is responsible for compliance with any authorization issued by the Commissioner.

VII. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS & SPECIAL CONDITIONS:

(I) The following discharge limits shall not be exceeded at any time:

(a) The flow of the Units 2 and 3 service water strainer backwashes shall not exceed 2600 gallons per minute.

(b) The discharge of Units 2 and 3 pump lubrication and leak off wastewater shall be maintained only when such discharges are necessary for plant operation.

(c) .The pH of the Units 2 and 3 service water strainer backwash discharges shall not be less than 6.0 or greater than 9.0 standard units at any time; (2) The following special conditions shall be complied with at all times:

(a) The Units 2 and 3 service water strainer backwash discharges shall not exceed the limitations specified in section VII. (1) above of this Authorization. The treatment system(s) shall be maintained as necessary to ensure that all limitations are met.

(b) Best management practices shall be implemented to ensure that no litter, debris, building materials or similar materials are discharged to the waters of the state.

(c) Operational practices as outlined on page four, section 3) A. 1 and 2 ofthe December 22, 1997 correspondence DI1 848 from Northeast Utilities to James Grier(Ref: Attachment 1) shall be implemented at all times.

(d) The management practices referenced as a) through d) on pages 3 and 4 of Letter D12418 (Ref:

Attachment 2) shall be followed during all periods of discharge.

(e) The management practices referenced as e) on page 4 of Letter D12418 (Ref: Attachment 2) shall be followed upon commencement of discharge at DSN OOIC-9.

(f) No discharge shall cause a violation of any condition or effluent limit as set forth in NPDES Permit CT0003263, except as authorized herein.

(g) The total mass of ETA discharged from Millstone Unit 3 during any day shall not exceed 686 kilograms.

(h) During discharge of 00IC-8 pursuant to section II.(5) of this Authorization, the maximum daily flow of OOIC-8 may exceed 100,000 gallons per day provided the total daily flow from Millstone Unit 3 during that day does not exceed I ;410,600,000 gallons.

(i) Units 2 and 3 service water chlorine injection points may be used as specified in submittals from NNECO referenced herein. At all times chlorine injection shall be regulated to maintain the minimum 4

I concentration needed to inhibit or eliminate biological activity.

(j) The concentration of hydrazine at DSN 006 shall not exceed either 50 ppb monthly average or 300 ppb daily maximum.

(k) During periods when auxilliary feedwater is used in the Unit 2 steam generators, the total daily combined mass of hydrazine discharged via DSN 001B-l and DSN 001B-l(a) shall not exceed 33.12 kg/day at a hydrazine concentration of no more than 125 ppm.

(l) With respect to hydrazine treatment at DSN.OOIB-6 (Unit 2 Condenstate Polishing Facility), treatment practices as set forth in section 2 (pages 4-6) of correspondence (D13038) from NNECO to J. Grier dated-September -1,1998 (Ref: Attachment 3) shall be implemented.

(m) During all periods of discharge, measures tomitigate the impact of ETA on the receiving water shall be implemented as specified in Letter D124 18 referenced in section V. (9) of this Authorization.

VII. MONITORING REQUIREMENTS:

(a) Unless otherwise specified in this Authorization, all samples collected to verify compliance with the limits in this Authorization shall be grab samples All samples shall be collected at points specified in this Authorization (b) On a semi-annual basis (Juxre and December) sampling for chlorine (free, and total residual) shall be conducted between the trash racks and traveling screens at Units 2 and 3. These samples shall be collected from the intake bays of active circulation pumps.

(c) On a semi-annual basis (June and December) sampling for chlorine (free, and total residual) shall be conducted at Units *1,2 and 3 for discharges from:

(1) The circulating water pump lubrication strainer backwash or source water for the circulating water pump lubrication strainer for Units 2 and 3.

(2) The service water strainer backwash for Units 1, 2 and 3.

(3) Flow estimates and field pH measurements of these discharges shall be recorded during every sampling event.

(d) On a monthly basis daily composite sampling for ethanolamine (ETA) and hydrazine shall be conducted at the DSN 006 sampling station; flow monitoring and the range of pH measurements shall be recorded for each sampling event.

(e) During periods when auxiliary feedwater is used in the Unit 2 steam generators, weekly grab sampling for hydrazine shall be conducted at DSNOO IB-1; total daily flow and pH measurements shall be recorded during each sampling event.

(f) On a quarterly basis (March, June, September and December) sampling for ETA shall be conducted at DSNs 00IC-2, 00IC-3, 001C-4, 001-6(b), and 00IC-9 of NPDES PermitNo.

CT0003263.

(g) In the event of an emergency condenser hotwell discharge as authorized in section II.(5) of this Authorization, DSN 001C-8 shall be monitored weekly for ETA and all associated pollutant parameters required pursuant to NPDES Permit No. CT0003263.

(h) On a quarterly basis (March, June, September and December) submit a summary of activities relative to the discharge of fire water system discharges as authorized in section 11. (13) of this Authorization.

5

(i) On a quarterly basis (March, Jude, September, and December) sampling for ETA and hydrazine shall be conducted at DSNs 001A-2, OOIB-2, and 001B-3. Estimated total daily flow shall be recorded for every sampling event.

(j) On a weekly basis sampling for hydrazine, ammonia nitrogen, and, when used, hydrogen peroxide shall be conducted at the Unit 2 Condensate Polishing Facility (DSN 001B-6).

.Estimated total daily flw,, estimated instantaes ow, and estimated number of discharge hours per day shall be recorded for each sampling event.

(k) All sample analyses which are required by this Authorization shall be performed using methods approved in accordance with 40CFR Part 136 or as approved in writing by the Commissioner, or as pending before the Commissioner in correspondence DI 0304 dated October 4, 1996.

IX. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS:

(a) Unless otherwise stated in this Authorization, NNECO shall submit the results of all monitoring as required in section VIII. of this Authorization on a quarterly basis, no later than 30 days following the last month of each quarter (March, June, September, and December). A monthly summary of

- any-violations of any of the limitations, terms or conditions of this Authorization, cause of any.

violation(s), and corrective action(s) undertaken andlor planned shall be submitted within 30 days of the beginning of the following month. NNECO shall comply with all reporting and notification requirements as specified in Sections 22a-430-3 and 4 of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies and as required in this Authorization. All monitoring reports and notifications specified herein shall be submitted to DEP at the address noted in section IX (c) of this Authorization.

(b) All reports shall be submitted in a reporting format prescribed by the Commissioner, as attached to this Authorization, or as later revised by the Commissioner.

(c) If a violation of any of the discharge limits specified in this Authorization occurs, the Commissioner shall be notified within 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> of becoming aware of the circumstances, or the next business day if NNECO becomes aware of such circumstances outside of normal business hours. Written notification must be submitted to the DEP within 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> at the following address:

Mr. James Grier Department of Environmental Protection Water Management Bureau Bureau of Water Management 79 Elm Street Hartford, CT 06106-5127.

(d) NNECO shall notify the DEP in writing of the date of final discontinuance of any discharge authorized herein.

X. OTHER REQUIREMENTS:

a) NNECO shall comply with all applicable Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies, including, without limitation, Section 22a-430-3 Subsection (b) General - subparagraph (1)(D) and subdivisions (2),

(3), (4) and (5) 6

4.

Subsection (c) Inspection and entry Subsection (d) Effect of a Permit - subdivisions (1) and (4)

Subsection (e) Duty to Comply Subsection (f) Proper Operation and Maintenance Subsection (g) Sludge Disposal Subsection (h) Duty to Mitigate Subsection (i) Facility Modifications, Notification - subdivisions (1) and (4)

Subsection (j) Monitoring Records and Reporting Requirements - subdivisions (1), (6), (7), (8), (9), and (I1) (except subparagraphs (9)(A)(2), and (9XC))

Subsection (k) Bypass Subsection (in) Effluent Limitations Violations Subsection (n) Enforcement Subsection (o) Resource Conservation Subsection (p) Spill Prevention and Control Subsection (q) Instrumentation, Alarms, Flow Recorders Subsection (r) Equalization Section 22a430-4 Subsection (t) Prohibitions Subsection (p) Revocation, Denial, Modification, Appendices b) The following additional terms and conditions shall be complied with:

1. This Authorization is for the discharge of (A) pollutafits in quantities and concentrations as specified in this Authorization and in correspondence submitted by NNECO, as set forth in section II. of this Authorization; and (B) any substances resulting from the processes or activities described in this Authorization and

, correspondence by NNECO, as set forth in sections I. and II. of this Authorization in concentrations and quantities which the Commissioner determines cannot reasonably be expected to cause-pollution. However, the Commissioner may seek an injunction or issue an order to prevent or abate pollution, and may seek criminalpenalties against a person who willfully or with criminal negligence causes or threatens pollution.

2. Discharge of any substance which is not from the processes or activities descried in this Authorization in correspondence submitted by NNECO, as set forth in sections I. and II. of this Authorization, shall be considered a violation of this Authorization unless it is authorized by an individual permit issued under Section 22a-430 ofthe General Statutes or a general permit issued under section 22a430b of the General Statutes.

3) Within fifteen days after the date NNECO becomes aware of a change in any information submitted to the Commissioner under any registration of this Authorization, or that any such information was inaccurate or misleading or that any relevant information was omitted, NNECO shall submit the correct or omitted information in writing to the Commissioner.

4) Nothing in this Authorization shall relieve NNECO of other obligations under applicable federal, state and local law.

5) Any document including but not limited to any notice, which is required to be submitted to the Commissioner under this Authorization by NNECO shall be signed 7

I 0 by NNECO and by the individual or individuals responsible for actually preparing such document, each of whom shall certify in writing as follows: "I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and certify that based on reasonable investigation, including my inquiry of those individuals responsible for obtaining the information, the submitted information is true, accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief, and I understand that any false statement made in this document or its attachments may be punishable as a criminal offense".

6) Any false statement in any information submitted pursuant to this Authorization may be punishable as a criminal offense under Section 22a-438 of the General Statutes or, in accordance with Section 22a-6, under Section 53a-157 of the General Statutes.

7) The Commissioner reserves the right to make appropriate revisions to this Emergency Authorization in order to establish any appropriate effluent limitations, schedules of compliance, or other provisions which may be necessary to adequately protect human health and the environment.

8) The Commissioner may order summary suspension of this Authorization in accordance with Section 4-182 of the Connecticut General Statutes.

I find that this Authorization is necessary to prevent, abate or mitigate an imminent threat to human health and the environment, and such Authorization is not inconsistent with the Clean Water Act.

Entered as an Emergency Authorization of the Commissioner of Environmental Protection.

Date . *r3. Rocque, Jr.

/fn issioner Facility ID. 152-003 Application No. 2000-IOEA Authorization No. EA0100176 PMWORKING\oaJCiME1NSToNENCoWL"ed EA I. 8.

http://wwvw.ctnow.com/news/custom/newsat3/hc-alertl 222.artdec22.1.2391 647.storvcoll=hc-big-headlines-breakinr Rowland: 'Let Us Do The Worrying'

[11",

By LYNNE TUOHY Courant Staff Writer December 22 2003 Gov. John G. Rowland deployed hundreds of state troopers and members of the National Guard to the state's .trains, bridges, ports and Millstone nuclear power plant Sunday, while at the same *as,FI:.TNANCTAL r T , ,,

I ,,. ,x time encouraging residents to go on with their holiday shopping RELATINSIP?

and travel plans.

"My message is very simple: Let us do the worrying," Rowland said at a late afternoon press conference. "I want everyone to shop, to enjoy their parties and their families. Precautions are in place.

"First and foremost, do not cancel your travel plans," Rowland said. "Do not be afraid to use the planes, the trains, the buses."

Rowland spoke forcefully and reassuringly on the elevation of the national security threat level to "high." He spoke of his conversation earlier in the day with U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, and of his request that federal officials order a no-fly zone over Millstone and the Indian Point Nuclear Power Station, on the lower Hudson River in New York.

Rowland echoed Ridge's statements that the volume of threats picked up by intelligence agencies, as well as specifics about again using airplanes as weapons and suicide bombings, were cause for concern.

F~yigaoX9 Cjw;Az.

"The key point here is that the threats are very significant, very credible and their volume is far greater than in the past," UW ,NERSERtOr 7Z Rowland said. "That the event will be greater and more harmful than 9/11 specifically gets our attention."

Rowland said he spoke with New York Gov. George Pataki mid-afternoon to coordinate added security on Metro North trains, which were staffed by at least one Connecticut state trooper beginning at 4 p.m. Sunday. Truck weigh stations across Connecticut were opened and will remain so around the clock, with tractor trailers required to check-in for inspection. "That will be a 24/7 coverage," Rowland said.

He referred to the Millstone nuclear power plant as "my most significant concern," and said that the aircraft operated by the state police - Trooper I - as well as three other aircraft would be running surveillance flights over the plant. Rowland said that securing a no-fly zone for a 10-mile radius over the plant is a difficult task, as national

transportation interests are implicated. Such a no-fly zone was in effect in the days following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, but a request by Rowland last March during a period of high alert was denied.

Rowland this morning was to hold a conference call to brief all of the state's mayors, first selectmen and police and fire chiefs.

"I want to tell all our residents that we are as prepared and safe as we possibly can be,"

Rowland said. "I encourage everyone to go on with their plans; do not cancel any plans."

Rowland said he knew of no specifics about targets, but in his letter to Ridge requesting the no-fly zone, the governor noted that Millstone "has been identified by your staff as a Connecticut site of 'high interest' for additional security protection."

He said that while Bradley International Airport obviously would be on heightened security status, he did not anticipate any added inconvenience to travelers. "Most travelers will not see any significant difference," Rowland said.

The heightened alert status did not seem to faze people who were out and about Sunday afternoon. Barbara Becker of West Hartford was at the Connecticut Expo Center, trying with others to set a new Guinness Book record for number of dreidels spinning at one time.

"I never think about those kinds of things," she said. "We go about our daily lives the way we normally do."

Becker said calls for increased security would make her worry more about family members who are traveling abroad than about safety inside the country's borders.

Later in the evening, Christopher Mason of Hartford said it's smart for security forces to be cautious, but the average person isn't being given enough information to know how to react to the orange alert.

"It's nothing that I have any control over," he said. "I'm just going to live my life the way it is."

The governor did not say how many security personnel were being deployed. He said the number was "significant" and included state troopers, bomb dogs, National Guard personnel and those staffing the weigh stations. Most, if not all, of the cost of overtime and additional staffing would be picked up by the federal Department of Homeland Security, he said.

The state is close to wrapping up a homeland security report that details possible targets in Connecticut, as well as the strengths and vulnerabilities of the state's security measures. The report is scheduled to be submitted to the federal homeland security office next month, and is a prerequisite for the release of about $35 million in federal funds to

pay for enhanced security measures. It will not be released publicly. Rowland said the work done to prepare the report, as well as progress in increasing security, has paid off.

"Are we in better shape than we were six months ago when we had our last high alert?

The answer is we're significantly better prepared," Rowland said.

Courant staff writers Carolyn Moreau and Roselyn Tantraphol contributed to this story.

Copyright2003, HartfordCourant

May 24, 2004 NOTE TO: File FROM: Richard Emch, Project Manager IRA/

Environmental Section License Renewal and Environmental Impacts Program Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

DOCKETING OF ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS PERTAINING TO WINTER FLOUNDER IN SUPPORT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF THE DOMINION NUCLEAR COMPANY'S LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR MILLSTONE POWER STATION This Note to File, makes the following correspondence publicly available:

• Millstone Power Station: An Evaluation of Cooling Water System Alternatives, August 2001.

The attached memo from Richard Gallagher of Dominion Nuclear dated March 29, 2004, provides the information to be docketed.

Attachments: As stated Docket Nos.: 50-336 and 50-423 Accession nos.:

1. Note to File: ML041460283

2. Attachments: 1) Millstone Power Station: An Evaluation of Cooling Water System Alternatives, August. 2001: ML040980392

3. Att. 2: Memo from R. Gallagher, DNC.: ML041120271, dated 4/16/04

4. Att. 3: Memo from R. Gallagher, DNC: ML040930259, dated 4/29/04

5. Pkg: ML041460287 Document name: C:\ORPCheckout\FileNET\ML041460283.wpd OFFICE RLEP:DRIP:LA RLEP:DRIP:PM RLEP:DRIP:PM NAME M. Jenkins L. Fields R. Emch DATE 5/24/04 5/21/04 5/24/04 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

May 24, 2004 NOTE TO: File FROM: Richard Emch, Project Manager /RAI Environmental Section License Renewal and Environmental Impacts Program Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

DOCKETING OF ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS PERTAINING TO WINTER FLOUNDER IN SUPPORT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF THE DOMINION NUCLEAR COMPANY'S LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR MILLSTONE POWER STATION This Note to File, makes the following correspondence publicly available:

• Millstone Power Station: An Evaluation of Cooling Water System Alternatives, August 2001.

The attached memo from Richard Gallagher of Dominion Nuclear dated March 29, 2004, provides the information to be docketed.

Attachments: As stated Docket Nos.: 50-336 and 50-423

June 1, 2004 NOTE TO: File FROM: Richard Emch, Senior Project Manager IRAI Environmental Section License Renewal and Environmental Impacts Program Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

DOCKETING OF DOCUMENTS PERTAINING TO WINTER FLOUNDER IN SUPPORT OF THE MILLSTONE POWER STATION UNITS 2 AND 3 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION This Note to File, makes the following correspondence publicly available:

• Feasibility Study of Cooling Water System Alternatives to Reduce Winter Flounder Entrainment at Millstone Units 1, 2, & 3, January 1993.

• Monitoring the Marine Environment of Long Island Sound at Millstone Power Station, Waterford, Connecticut, Annual Report 2001.

• Monitoring the Marine Environment of Long Island Sound at Millstone Power Station, Waterford, Connecticut, Annual Report 2002.

• Report to Millstone Environmental Laboratory, Ecological Advisory Committee, Analysis of winter flounder larvae, by Dr. J. Crivello, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, February 12, 2002.

• Characterization of Winter Flounder (Pseudopleuronectes americanus) Larval Genetic.

Stock Structure Within Eastern Long Island Sound: Estimation of Larval Entrainment and Recruitment, A Report Made to the Millstone Environmental Laboratory, Millstone Power Station, Waterford, Connecticut.

The attached memos from Richard Gallagher of Dominion Nuclear dated March 25, and March 29, 2004 provide a listing of the information to be docketed.

Attachments: As stated Docket Nos.: 50-336 and 50-423 Accession nos.: See next page Note to File: ML041560169 Pkg: ML041560198 Document name: C:\ORPCheckout\FileNET\ML041560169.wpd .

I.

ll OFFICE lRLEP:DRIP:LA I RLEP:DRIP:PM I RLEP:DRIP:PM A NAME l M. Jenkins IL. Fields IR. Emch DATE 16/1/04 l6/1/04 l6/1/04 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of DOMINION NUCLEAR CONNECTICUT, INC. :Docket Nos. 50-336-LR, 50-423-LR (Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3) ASLBP No. 04-824-01-LR CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing "Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone Motion for Reconsideration and for Request for Leave to Amend Petition" and accompanying uPetition for Review' was sent via U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid on July 9, 2004 to the following Administrative Judge Administrative Judge Dr. Paul B. Abramson, Chair Ann Marshall Young Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Atomic Safety and Mail Stop T-3 F23 Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop T-3 F23 Washington DC 20555-0001 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory pbaa)nrc.qov Commission amvefnrc.qov Administrative Judge Dr. Richard P. Cole Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Mail Stop T-3, F23 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555-0001 Rfcl@nrc.gov Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555 (Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudication Staff)

(Original + 2) hearingdocket(nrc.gov JMC3@nrc.gov Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555-0001 13

David R. Lewis, Esq: Lillian M. Cuoco, Esq.

Shaw Pittman LLP Millstone Nuclear Power Station 2300 N Street NW Building 475/5 Washington DC 20037-1128 Rope Ferry Road David .lewise~shawmittman.com Waterford CT 06385 Lillian Cuoco(dom.com Nancy B in,sq.

147 Crag Highway Redding Ridge CT 06876 Tel. 203-938-3952/Fax 203-938-3168 nancyburtonesq@aol.com Fed. Bar No. ct5550 14