ML043490648
| ML043490648 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 11/09/2004 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Dam W, NRR/DRIP/RLEP, 415-3407 | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML043490646 | List: |
| References | |
| +sispmjr200511 | |
| Download: ML043490648 (84) | |
Text
1 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Corrected Transcript
Title:
D.C. Cook License Renewal Pubic Meeting Afternoon Session Docket Number:
50-315 and 50-316 Location:
Bridgman, Michigan Date:
Tuesday, November 9, 2004 Work Order No.:
NRC-098 Pages 1-66 NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC.
Court Reporters and Transcribers 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 234-4433 U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 1
2 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
+ + + + +
1 DONALD C. COOK NUCLEAR PLANT 2
UNITS 1 AND 2 3
PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS 4
THE SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT 5
STATEMENT FOR LICENSE RENEWAL 6
+ + + + +
7 PUBLIC MEETING B AFTERNOON SESSION 8
+ + + + +
9 TUESDAY 10 NOVEMBER 9, 2004 11
+ + + + +
12 BRIDGMAN, MICHIGAN 13
+ + + + +
14 The meeting was held at 1:32 p.m., at the Lake 15 Charter Township Hall, 3220 Shawnee Road, Bridgman, 16 Michigan. Chip Cameron, Facilitator, presiding.
17 PRESENTERS:
18 Andy Kugler 19 William Dam 20 Bob Palla 21 Kirk LaGory 22 23 24 A-G-E-N-D-A 25
3 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 PAGE 1
WELCOME - Facilitator Cameron 3
2 Andrew Kugler...............
7 3
Overview of License Renewal Process 4
William Dam................ 12 5
Results of the Environmental Review 6
Kirk LaGory................ 15 7
Severe Accident Mitigation Alternative 8
Mark Rubin
................ 26 9
How Comments can be submitted 10 William Dam................ 33 11 Public Comments:
12 Mano Nazar, American Electric Power
...... 35 13 John Gast, Supervisor Lake Township....... 39 14 Kevin Ivers, Bridgman Public Schools
...... 40 15 Anna Murphy, United Way............. 41 16 Greg Koroch, Lake Michigan College
....... 42 17 H. E. "Buzz" Calvert, Volunteer Center of 18 SW Michigan................ 43 19 Mike Green, Harbor Habitat for Humanity..... 44 20 Mike Poluhanyo, Citizen............. 47 21 Closing Remarks 22 Chip Cameron
.................. 47 23 24
4 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 1
FACILITATOR CAMERON: If everybody could 2
take a seat, we'll get started with - - with today's 3
meeting. Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Chip 4
Cameron and I'm the Special Counsel for Public 5
Liaison at the United Stated Nuclear Regulatory 6
Commission and it's my pleasure to welcome you all 7
to the NRC's public meeting today. And the subject 8
of the meeting is going to focus on the draft 9
Environmental Impact Statement that the NRC has 10 prepared to help us in our evaluation of an 11 application that we received from Indiana Michigan 12 Power Company to renew the operating licenses at the 13 D.C. Cook Plant for both Units One and Two at D.C.
14 Cook.
15 And I'm going to be your facilitator 16 today, and I will just try to help all of you to 17 have a productive meeting this afternoon. Our 18 format for the meeting is basically going to be a 19 two-part format. In the first part of the meeting, 20 we're going to give you some background information 21 on the NRC's license renewal evaluation process, 22 specifically on the findings and conclusions in the 23 draft Environmental Impact Statement.
24 The second part of the meeting, is to 25
5 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 give us an opportunity to hear from all of you in 1
terms of any advice, recommendations, and concerns 2
that you might have about the draft Environmental 3
Impact Statement. We are taking written comments on 4
the draft Environmental Impact Statement, but we're 5
here today and another meeting tonight to meet with 6
you in person on these issues. And let me assure 7
you that anything that is said today will carry the 8
same weight as a written comment.
9 The ground rules are very simple.
10 During the question part of the meeting - - during 11 the first part of the meeting, if you have a 12 question, just signal me, and I'll bring you this 13 cordless microphone. Give us your name and 14 affiliation, if appropriate. And we'll try to 15 answer your question.
16 We are taking a transcript. Tracy is 17 our electronic court reporter/transcriptionist here, 18 and that will be our record of the meeting and it 19 will be available to any of you who want to have a 20 copy.
21 When we get to the second part of the 22 meeting, we'll call you to come up to the podium to 23 speak to us. If you feel more comfortable staying 24 where you are and speaking into the cordless mike, 25
6 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 we can do that also. And usually, I ask people to 1
try to be concise and we have a five-minute 2
guideline for the formal comments, but I don't think 3
we're going to have any problem in terms of time 4
today. So just keep the five minutes in mind.
5 In terms of the presenters for today's 6
meeting, and this will give you an idea about the 7
agenda, we're going to start off with - - and I'll 8
give you a little bit of background on each of these 9
people in a minute. But we're going to start off 10 with Mr. Andy Kugler, who's right here, from the 11 NRC. And Andy is the chief of the section that does 12 the environmental reviews, not only on all the 13 applications that come in for reactor license 14 renewal, but any environmental review for a reactor 15 licensing issue. And he's going to give you an 16 overview of license renewal.
17 And then we're going to go to Mr. Bill 18 Dam, who is right here. Bill works for Andy and 19 he's the project manager on the environmental review 20 on the D.C. Cook license renewal application.
21 After they're done, we'll see if there's 22 any questions about the process overall. And then 23 we're going to go to the heart of the meeting today, 24 which is the conclusions in the draft Environmental 25
7 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Impact Statement, and we have Mr. Kirk LaGory here.
1 Kirk is one of our expert consultants and he's the 2
team leader of the experts that we have working to 3
prepare this Environmental Impact Statement. He'll 4
talk about the conclusions there. Again, we'll go 5
out for questions to you.
6 And then we're going to go to a 7
specialized part of the draft Environmental Impact 8
Statement and this is something called the Severe 9
Accident Mitigation Alternatives. We have Mr. Mark 10 Rubin with us right here this afternoon, who's going 11 to talk to that, go out to you for questions again, 12 and then we're going to go back to Mr. Bill Dam to 13 tell us about some conclusions. And that's going to 14 be our agenda for today.
15 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Mr. Kugler has 16 been with the NRC for 14 years. He was in the Navy 17 Submarine Service. He has just been appointed as 18 the Section Chief for the Environmental Review 19 Section, a few months ago. He has a Bachelor of 20 Science in mechanical engineering from Cooper Union 21 in New York City, and a Master of Science in 22 technical management from Johns Hopkins University.
23 And Bill Dam who is the project manager 24 on the environmental review, again, he works for 25
8 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Andy. He's been with the NRC for about seven years, 1
and he was an environmental consultant before that.
2 And he has a Bachelor's Degree in geology from 3
Guildford College in Greensboro North Carolina, and 4
a Master's degree in Geology from the University of 5
Wyoming.
6 And Kirk LaGory, he is with Argonne Lab.
7 He is an ecologist. He has a PhD in zoology and 8
that PhD is from Miami University of Ohio.
9 Mark Rubin is a Section Chief in 10 something called the Probabilistic Safety Assessment 11 branch in our Nuclear Reactor Regulation office back 12 in Washington, D.C. He has over 25 years of 13 experience in safety and probabilistic risk 14 assessment. And he has a Bachelor's and Master's 15 degree in engineering from UCLA and also a Master's 16 in Business Administration from the University of 17 Maryland. He's a member of the American Nuclear 18 Society's Risk Informed Standards Committee.
19 But that gives you an idea of what their 20 credentials are and I just would thank all of you 21 for coming out to be with us for today's meeting.
22 And I'll turn it over to Andy.
23 ANDREW KUGLER: Thank you, Chip. Thank 24 you all today for coming to our meeting today. I 25
9 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 hope that the information we provide to you will be 1
helpful and will help you to understand the process 2
that we're going through right now, what we've done 3
so far in that process, and the role that you can 4
play in helping to insure that our final 5
environmental impact statement is an accurate 6
document.
7 First let me provide some general 8
context on license renewal. The Atomic Energy Act 9
gives the NRC the authority to issue operating 10 licenses for nuclear power plants for a period of 11 forty years. For D.C. Cook, Units One and Two, 12 these licenses will expire in the years 2014 and 13 2017 respectively.
14 Our regulations also make provisions for 15 us to grant 20-year extensions to operating 16 licenses. The Indiana Michigan Power Company has 17 requested extensions of the licenses for Cook units 18 one and two. As part of the NRC's review of a 19 license renewal application, we perform an 20 environmental review to look at the impacts of 21 running the units for an additional 20 years. We 22 held a meeting here back in March where we discussed 23 the scope of our review, and we've returned now to 24 go over the preliminary results of our review as 25
10 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 discussed in the draft Environmental Impact 1
Statement. And to give you an opportunity to ask 2
questions or provide comments on the draft.
3 Before I get into the discussion of the 4
license renewal process itself, I'd like to take a 5
minute to talk about the NRC in terms of what we do 6
and what our mission is. As I mentioned, the Atomic 7
Energy Act is a legislation that authorizes us to 8
regulate the civilian use of nuclear materials in 9
the United States.
10 In exercising that authority, the NRC 11 has a three-fold mission. The first is to insure 12 the adequate protection of the public health and 13 safety. We also have a mission to protect the 14 environment, and finally, to insure the common 15 defense and security. The NRC accomplishes its 16 mission through a combination of regulatory programs 17 and processes, such as inspections, enforcement 18 actions, assessments of licensee's performance, and 19 the evaluation of operating experience at the plants 20 throughout the country.
21 Turning now to license renewal, the 22 review that we perform is very similar to the review 23 that was performed when these plants were originally 24 licensed. And in that regard, there are really two 25
11 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 parts to the review. A safety review and an 1
environmental review.
2 The safety review includes a safety 3
evaluation, plant inspections and audits, and an 4
independent review by the Advisory Committee on 5
Reactor Safeguards. Also referred to as the ACRS.
6 Now there are two basic types of safety issues that 7
we might be looking at. One is the current issues 8
at the plant and these are dealt with today and on 9
an on-going basis. And the other issues related to 10 aging management or the aging of equipment in the 11 plant. And these are dealt with in license renewal.
12 Under the current operating license, the 13 NRC's oversight process monitors current issues and 14 responds to those issues. We don't wait until an 15 application for license renewal to deal with the 16 current issues at a plant. And because the NRC has 17 or is dealing with issues such as security and 18 emergency planning on a continuing basis, we don't 19 reevaluate them in our license renewal review.
20 Instead, the license renewal safety 21 review focuses on aging management issues and the 22 programs that the licensee either has or will have 23 in place to maintain the equipment safely. We look 24 at specific groups of components and make a 25
12 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 determination whether current or planned programs 1
will insure that the issues related to aging are 2
detected and properly managed for the period of 3
extended operation. The results are then documented 4
in a safety evaluation report.
5 That report is independently reviewed 6
by the ACRS. Now, the ACRS is a group of technical 7
experts in nuclear safety, and they serve as a 8
consulting body for the Commission. They'll review 9
each license renewal application and the safety 10 evaluation report and make their own determinations 11 and conclusions and then report those independently 12 to the Commission.
13 In relation to the environmental review 14 which Mr. Bill Dam will discuss in more detail in a 15 few minutes, we evaluate the impacts of the 16 continued operation of the Plant in a number of 17 areas. These would include ecology, hydrology, 18 cultural resources, socieoeconomics and a number of 19 other areas.
20 Next slide please. This slide gives a 21 graphic representation of the license renewal 22 process. As I indicated, there's two basic paths in 23 this review. The upper path is the safety review.
24 And then the lower path is the environmental review.
25
13 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 The safety review involves the staff's 1
review and assessment of safety information that was 2
provided in the licensee's application. There's a 3
team of about 30 NRC technical reviewers and 4
contractors who are involved in conducting this 5
review. The safety review focuses on the 6
effectiveness of the aging management programs for 7
the plant systems and structures that are within the 8
scope of license renewal. The NRC staff reviews the 9
effectiveness of these programs to insure that the 10 plant can be safely maintained throughout the 11 license renewal term.
12 The safety review process also involves 13 audits and on-site inspections. These inspections 14 are conducted by a team of inspectors pulled from 15 both headquarters and our regional office. We have 16 a representative of our inspection program here 17 today and he's the senior resident inspector at D.C.
18 Cook. His name is Brian Kemker. Brian, if you 19 could. We also have an individual from the Region 20 Three office and that's Patricia Lougheed.
21 The results of the inspections are 22 recorded in separate inspection reports and these 23 results and the results of the staff's aging 24 management review will be documented in the safety 25
14 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 evaluation report. As I mentioned, that report will 1
then be provided to the ACRS for its independent 2
review. Two of the on-site inspections have been 3
completed and we are in the process of preparing the 4
safety evaluation report right now.
5 The second part of the review process 6
involves the environmental review. The scoping 7
activities that were carried out earlier and the 8
development of a draft supplement to the Generic 9
Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal 10 of Nuclear Power Plants, a document we refer to as 11 the GEIS. The draft Environmental Impact Statement 12 has been published for comment and we're here 13 tonight to briefly discuss the results and to 14 receive your comments. We expect to issue the 15 final Environmental Impact Statement in May of next 16 year. And this will incorporate any comments we 17 receive here today and any comments we receive in 18 writing during the comment period.
19 So as you can see from this slide, there 20 are a number of things that will go into the 21 Commission's eventual decision as to whether or not 22 to approve license renewal for D.C. Cook Units One 23 and Two. There needs to be a Safety Evaluation 24 Report, an Environmental Impact Statement, the 25
15 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 inspection reports from the region, and the 1
independent review by the ACRS.
2 I'd like to point out the splash symbols 3
on the slide. These indicate opportunities for 4
public involvement in the review. The first 5
opportunity occurred during the scoping period back 6
in March when we gave people an opportunity to 7
provide inputs on what the scope of our review 8
should be. We held meetings here at that time and 9
some of you may have attended that meeting.
10 This meeting on the draft Environmental 11 Impact Statement is another opportunity. It is also 12 an opportunity to request a formal adjudicatory 13 hearing on the license renewal review. This hearing 14 would have taken place in front of an Atomic Safety 15 and Licensing Board panel. However, no one 16 requested a hearing and so that portion of the 17 review is not applicable here. And then, finally, 18 the ACRS meeting to discuss the results of the 19 safety review will be open to the public.
20 Now I'd like to turn things over to Mr.
21 Bill Dam and he'll discuss the environmental review 22 in a bit more detail. Thank you.
23 WILLIAM DAM: Thanks, Andy. My name is 24 Bill Dam and I'm the environmental project manager.
25
16 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 My responsibility is to coordinate the efforts of 1
NRC staff including a team from national 2
laboratories who have expert knowledge in various 3
environmental fields, and help us prepare the 4
Environmental Impact Statement.
5 The National Environmental Policy Act of 6
1969 requires a systematic approach in evaluating 7
impacts of proposed major federal actions.
8 Consideration is given to the environmental impacts 9
of the proposed action, the mitigation for any 10 impacts that are believed to be significant 11 alternatives taken into account and no action 12 alternatives on the applicant's request are also 13 considered.
14 The Environmental Impact Statement is a 15 disclosure tool and it involves public 16 participation. NRC regulations require that an 17 Environmental Impact Statement be prepared for the 18 proposed license renewal activities. So we're 19 here today to collect public comments on the draft 20 statement and include those comments on the final 21 report.
22 This slide defines our legal decision 23 standard that follows from our environmental 24 analysis. It basically asks two questions: Is the 25
17 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 license renewal acceptable from an environmental 1
standpoint; and secondly, should the option for 2
extending power plant operations be preserved. We, 3
at the NRC, do not decide whether the D.C. Cook 4
plant actually operates an additional 20 years.
5 That decision is left up to the power company, to 6
the state regulators, and other people who make that 7
final decision for continuing plant operations.
8 Andy already described the overall 9
safety and environmental process. Here we have a 10 more detailed environmental process slide that we go 11 through in evaluating an application for license 12 renewal. The Indiana Michigan Power Company 13 submitted their application for license renewal to 14 the NRC on October 31, 2003. We subsequently put 15 formal notice in the Federal Register that we would 16 prepare an Environmental Impact Statement associated 17 with that application. The Federal Register notice 18 began the scoping process, which invited public 19 participation early in the process. We conducted a 20 scoping meeting in early March of that year to 21 examine the bounds of our environmental evaluation.
22 We also brought a team of experts from 23 national labs to examine inside and outside the 24 power plant, to review a substantial volume of 25
18 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 information that was available to us and also to 1
interview site personnel as well as going out into 2
the community and meeting with local and state 3
officials. If, after all that activity, we still 4
don't have all the information that we need to help 5
us prepare draft Environmental Impact Statement, we 6
send out a formal request for additional information 7
that is sent to the applicant. So three weeks after 8
we performed our site audit, we prepared and sent 9
out a request for information on those remaining 10 issues or concerns that we had.
11 After we get back the answers to the 12 request for information and we examine all the 13 information we have, we put that into and issue a 14 draft Environmental Impact Statement. We issued the 15 draft supplement to the Generic Environmental Impact 16 Statement about six weeks ago. And in a few 17 minutes, we'll be hearing from Dr. Kirk LaGory, the 18 Argonne National Lab Team Leader, who will share the 19 results of our findings.
20 Presently, we're in the middle of the 21 public comment period on the draft statement which 22 will expire in about five weeks. Once we get all 23 the public comments in, including what we receive at 24 this meeting, then we will evaluate all that and 25
19 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 publish a final Environmental Impact Statement. Our 1
schedule presently provides for the final 2
Environmental Impact Statement to be published May, 3
2005.
4 That concludes my remarks and I'd be 5
happy to answer questions.
6 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Thank you, Andy.
7 Thanks, Bill. We're going to go to Dr. Kirk LaGory 8
now to tell us about what the findings are in the 9
draft Environmental Impact Statement.
10 KIRK LAGORY: Thank you, Chip. Again, 11 my name is Kirk LaGory. I am an ecologist at 12 Argonne National Laboratory and I am the project 13 team leader for the Cook Plant EIS. The NRC 14 contracted with Argonne and Pacific Northwest 15 National Laboratory to provide the expertise 16 necessary to evaluate the impacts of license renewal 17 at the Cook Nuclear Plant. The EIS team consists of 18 scientists from the two national laboratories as 19 well as NRC staff. This slide shows the team 20 expertise represented by those staff. We really 21 cover the full range of possible impact area growing 22 from air, human systems, socioeconomics, things like 23 jobs, education, environmental justice issues, 24 archeology, historical resources. Issues associated 25
20 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 with - - with the land. Terrestrial ecology and 1
land use. Issues associated with the water. Things 2
like aquatic ecology, hydrology, both surface water 3
and ground water hydrology. And then we also look 4
at radiation protection and regulatory compliance 5
issues. Next slide.
6 This slide shows our overall approach in 7
preparing the EIS. Before I go into this slide, 8
though, I'd like to give you some background to help 9
you understand the overall process. Back in the 10 mid-90's, the NRC evaluated the impacts of all 11 operating nuclear plants across the country. NRC 12 looked at 92 separate impact areas and found that 13 for 69 issues, the impacts would be the same for all 14 plants that had similar features. NRC called these, 15 Category One issues and made the same generic 16 determination about their impacts. They determined 17 that the impacts would be small. And published 18 their findings in the Generic Environmental Impact 19 Statement for License Renewal, which was issued in 20 1996.
21 The NRC was unable to make generic 22 conclusions about the remaining 23 issues. These 23 were called Category Two issues. And determined 24 that a site-specific supplemental EIS would have to 25
21 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 be prepared to cover those Category Two issues. And 1
it is the supplement for the Cook plant that we're 2
talking about today.
3 So this slide shows the process that we 4
used. We looked at the Category One issues relevant 5
to the Cook Plant to determine if the conclusion in 6
the Generic EIS was still valid. Specifically, we 7
looked for any new and significant information that 8
might change that conclusion. If we found no 9
significant information or new information, we 10 adopted the conclusions in the Generic EIS. If, 11 however, new and significant information was 12 identified, then a site-specific analysis was 13 performed.
14 For all Category Two issues that were 15 relevant to the Cook Plant, we performed site-16 specific analyses. And that is really the bulk of 17 the EIS that addresses those Category Two issues, 18 the site-specific analysis relevant to those. On 19 the right hand portion of this slide, there shows 20 that there also is a process to identify new issues, 21 issues that were not considered in the generic EIS.
22 If those come to the attention of the team during 23 the process, those are considered and then included, 24 if relevant. That was - - we did not find any 25
22 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 potential new issues for the Cook Plant.
1 In the generic EIS, the NRC defined 2
three impact levels: Small, moderate and large.
3 And the definitions for those impact levels are 4
provided in this slide. A small effect would not be 5
detectable or would be too small to destabilize or 6
noticeably alter any important attribute of the 7
resource under consideration.
8 A moderate effect would be one that is 9
sufficient to noticeably alter a resource but not 10 destabilize important attributes of that resource.
11 And then a large effect is one that 12 would be clearly noticeable and would be sufficient 13 to destabilize important attributes of the resource.
14 To illustrate the way we use these 15 impact levels, I'm going to talk about the Lake 16 Michigan Fishery. The operation of the Cook Plant 17 may cause the loss of fish at the cooling system 18 intake structure. If the loss of fish is so small 19 that it cannot be detected in relation to the total 20 population in Lake Michigan or to the population in 21 the area around the Cook Plant, then we would call 22 that impact small. If the losses resulting from 23 cooling system intake were large enough to cause a 24 slight decline in the population, but then the 25
23 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 population stabilized at a lower level, then we 1
would call that impact, moderate. If, however, 2
the losses caused the populations to decline 3
substantially and continue to decline - - in other 4
words, they became unstable, then we would call that 5
type of impact large. Next slide.
6 When the EIS team evaluated the impacts 7
from continued operations at the Cook Nuclear Plant, 8
we considered information from a wide variety of 9
sources. First, we looked at the environmental 10 report that the applicant prepared and included 11 within the license renewal application. In March, 12 we performed a site audit where EIS team members 13 visited the site and the surroundings, interviewed 14 plant personnel and reviewed documentation of plant 15 operations. We also talked to federal, state and 16 local agencies, permitting authorities and social 17 services, basically to determine if there were 18 concerns about the past operations of the Cook Plant 19 and if those entities had any information that we 20 might use in our impact analysis. And then lastly, 21 we received public comments during the scoping 22 period and included that information in our overall 23 process. All of this information forms the basis 24 for the analysis and preliminary conclusions that 25
24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 are in the draft EIS. Next slide.
1 The Cook EIS considers the environmental 2
impacts of continued operations of Units One and Two 3
during the 20-year license renewal term, that is 4
2014 to 2034, for Unit One; and 2017 to 2037 for 5
Unit Two. The impacts of routine operations were 6
considered for the cooling system, for the 7
transmission lines that were built to connect the 8
Cook Plant to the electrical grid, for radiological 9
issues, for socioeconomic issues such as jobs and 10 education, for ground water use and quality, for 11 threatened and endangered species, cumulative 12 impacts, as well as for postulated accidents and 13 severe accident mitigation alternatives. In this 14 talk, I'm going to speak directly to the impacts of 15 routine operations. Mark Rubin will talk about the 16 impacts of the - - or the accident analysis that was 17 performed by the NRC.
18 So one of the issues that we looked very 19 closely at were the impacts of the cooling system at 20 the Cook Plant. There are three Category Two issues 21 relevant to that cooling system. Entrainment of 22 fish and shellfish in early life stages, impingement 23 of fish and shellfish, and heat shock. Entrainment 24 refers to the pulling in of small organisms - -
25
25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 aquatic organisms into the cooling system.
1 Impingement refers to the pulling in of 2
larger organisms into the cooling system and those 3
larger organisms become pinned on the debris screens 4
that protect the cooling system from debris and 5
other floating or suspended material in the water.
6 Heat shock occurs when relatively warm 7
water is released into cool water. Aquatic 8
organisms that are adapted to that cooler water can 9
lose equilibrium or even die when exposed to 10 significantly warmer water. All of these processes 11 can result in mortality of organisms.
12 When we looked at the monitoring results 13 and various studies that have been conducted, the 14 numbers of organisms that have been entrained and 15 impinged or affected by heat shock and the number -
16
- those numbers relative to the overall populations 17 in the lake and in that general area, we came to the 18 conclusion that the potential impact in these areas 19 would be small and that additional mitigation is not 20 warranted.
21 There are also a number of Category One 22 issues related to the cooling system that we looked 23 at. Some issues - - some such issues are water use 24 conflicts, accumulation of contaminants and 25
26 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 discharge of sanitary waste. In the generic EIS the 1
NRC determined that the impacts associated with 2
these category one issues would be small. We 3
evaluated all information to see if there was any 4
new and significant information for these issues.
5 We did not find any and therefore, adopted NRC's 6
generic conclusion that the impact of the cooling 7
system for these Category One issues would also be 8
small.
9 The radiological impacts of normal 10 operations including radiation exposure to the 11 public and occupational radiation exposures to the 12 public was considered by the NRC in the generic 13 Environmental Impact Statement and a determination 14 was made that these were Category One issues. In 15 other words, the impacts varied little across the 16 various plants in the country, and that those 17 impacts would be small over the 20-year license 18 renewal period.
19 But because these releases are of 20 concern to the public, I'm going to discuss these in 21 a little bit more detail here. All nuclear plants 22 release some radiological effluents to the 23 environment. During our site visit, we looked at 24 the documentation for effluent release and the 25
27 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 radiological monitoring program at Cook. We looked 1
at how the gaseous and liquid effluents were treated 2
and released, as well as how the solid wastes were 3
treated, packaged and shipped from the site. We 4
looked at how the applicant determines and 5
demonstrates that they are in compliance with the 6
regulation for release of radiological effluents.
7 We also looked at data from on-site and near site 8
locations that the applicant monitors for airborne 9
releases and direct radiation and at other 10 monitoring stations beyond the site boundary, 11 including locations where water, milk, fish and food 12 products are sampled.
13 We found that the maximum calculated 14 doses for a member of the public are well within 15 annual limits that are considered protective of 16 human health. Since releases from the plant are not 17 expected to increase during the 20-year license 18 renewal term, and since we also found no new and 19 significant information related to this issue, we 20 adopted the generic conclusion in the generic EIS 21 that the radiological impact on human health and the 22 environment is small.
23 Impacts to threatened and endangered 24 species is also considered a Category Two issue that 25
28 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 requires a site-specific review. Our evaluation 1
considered those species that are known to occur or 2
could occur in the vicinity of the Cook Plant or the 3
transmission lines associated with the Plant. This 4
slide shows the 11 species that could occur in the 5
project area. We evaluated the locations of these 6
species, their habitats, and the possibility of 7
impacts over the 20-year license renewal period. We 8
also discussed our findings with the US Fish and 9
Wildlife Service that oversees implementation of the 10 Endangered Species Act. The Fish and Wildlife 11 Service concurred with our conclusion that 12 relicensing would not affect these species.
13 Waste water disposal at the Cook Plant has 14 the potential to affect ground water quality because 15 the plant discharges processed waste water and 16 sanitary wastes to two absorption ponds and two 17 sewage lagoons on the site. And here are the 18 absorption ponds and then the sewage lagoons next to 19 those. These two disposal systems receive effluent 20 that is treated, but then further treatment is 21 provided by the natural soil column as the effluent 22 flows through that soil column and into the 23 underlying groundwater. Discharges flow ultimately 24 into Lake Michigan.
25
29 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Monitoring wells are used to regularly 1
monitor groundwater quality in this area. This 2
monitoring over the years has shown that groundwater 3
quality has been in compliance with permit 4
requirements and with national drinking water 5
standards. And I might add that permits are 6
regulated by the Michigan Department of 7
Environmental Quality and that they oversee 8
compliance with permits and standards.
9 On the basis of this information, we 10 concluded that the impacts to groundwater quality 11 would be small and that additional mitigation is not 12 warranted. Next Slide.
13 We also considered cumulative impacts of 14 operations. Cumulative impacts are those impacts 15 that are minor when considered individually, but 16 significant when considered with other past, present 17 and future actions regardless of what agency or 18 person undertakes those other actions. The staff 19 considered cumulative impacts resulting from 20 operation of the cooling water system, operation of 21 the transmission lines, releases of radiation and 22 radiological material into the environment, 23 socioeconomic impacts, groundwater use and quality 24 impacts, and impacts to threatened and endangered 25
30 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 species. And we looked at the cumulative impacts 1
that would occur over the 20-year license renewal 2
term. Our preliminary determination is that any 3
cumulative impacts resulting from operation of the 4
Cook Nuclear Plant during the license renewal period 5
would be small.
6 We also looked at impacts to the uranium 7
fuel cycle and solid waste management and 8
decommissioning. In the generic EIS, the NRC 9
considered impact areas associated with these topics 10 as Category One issues. Our team found no new and 11 significant information associated with these topics 12 and therefore adopted the conclusion in the generic 13 EIS that impacts in these areas would be small.
14 Cook Nuclear Plant Units One and Two have 15 a combined capacity of over 2,000 megawatts. The 16 EIS team evaluating the potential environmental 17 impacts associated with the Cook Plant not 18 continuing operation and replacing its generating 19 capacity with alternative power sources. We looked 20 at a no action alternative where the power capacity 21 of the Cook Plant would not be replaced. We looked 22 at replacement of that capacity with new generation 23 from either coal, natural gas or new nuclear. We 24 looked at replacement of that capacity with 25
31 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 purchased electrical power and then we looked at 1
other alternatives including oil, wind, solar and 2
conservation. And then we examined the impacts of a 3
combination of those various alternatives.
4 For each alternative, we looked at the 5
same types of issues that we looked at for the 6
operation of the Cook Plant during the license 7
renewal term. The team's preliminary conclusion is 8
that the environmental impacts of alternatives - -
9 of all alternatives reach moderate or large 10 significance in at least some impact categories. So 11 the impacts of all alternatives would have larger 12 environmental impacts than the impacts of 13 relicensing over the 20-year - - for another 20 14 years. Next slide.
15 So our preliminary conclusions for the 16 Category One issues presented in the generic EIS, we 17 found no information that was both new and 18 significant. Therefore, we have preliminarily 19 adopted the conclusion that impacts associated with 20 these issues are small.
21 In the supplement EIS, we analyzed the 22 remaining Category Two issues pertinent to the Cook 23 Plant as well as the issue of groundwater quality 24 degradation associated with on-site disposal of 25
32 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 processed waste water and sanitary waste water, 1
those impacts also would be small.
2 And lastly, we found that for all 3
alternatives, at least in some impact categories, 4
and this is usually related to the amount of land 5
disturbance associated with building new capacity, 6
that there would likely be moderate or large impact 7
in some impact area.
8 So that concludes my talk. I'll turn this 9
back to Chip and we can address questions.
10 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thank you, 11 Kirk. Are there any questions about the material 12 that Kirk covered in regard to environmental 13 impacts? Yes, sir? And just give us your name, 14 too, please. Introduce yourself.
15 MIKE POLUHANYO: Yes, my name is Mike 16 Poluhanoy and I'm a citizen here in Berrien County.
17 I wonder if you could review and go back to the 18 radiological impacts. You've concluded that the 19 impact was small. Could you give us details how did 20 you arrive exactly? I mean, is there some kind of 21 numeric figure you came up that says it's small?
22 And if so, what would be a figure or whatever that 23 you would consider greater than small? Could you 24 give us a little more details on the numbers in that 25
33 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 area, please?
1 KIRK LAGORY: As far as the radiological 2
impacts, what we're doing to determine significance 3
there is comparing it to regulatory requirements.
4 To look at specific levels that are considered 5
protective of human health. So we're comparing them 6
against those standards. And those standards have 7
been established by the EPA and others. What we've 8
done is for our evaluation what we did, was we 9
looked at the radiological effluent monitoring 10 reports that are produced on an annual basis, looked 11 at the results of that monitoring, looked at the 12 off-site dose calculations that have been - - that 13 have been conducted and determined whether or not 14 those calculate either measured or calculated levels 15
- - how they compared to those levels that are 16 considered protective of human health. And in all 17 cases, those levels were well below those standards.
18 MIKE POLUHANYO: I don't think that 19 answers my question very well. I guess you seem to 20 be generalizing. I'd like something a little bit 21 more specific. I mean if there's than several 22 categories, how you measure - - I was looking for 23 some kind of measurement or something that would 24 say, well, yeah, this is small and then - - you know 25
34 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 how do we - -
1 KIRK LAGORY: 100 millirems, I believe is 2
the dose that is considered - -
3 MIKE POLUHANYO: That's what I'm - - Okay.
4 KIRK LAGORY: Right.
5 MIKE POLUHANYO: Okay. And it was well 6
below that. That's what I wanted to know. Thank 7
you.
8 KIRK LAGORY: Right. Right.
9 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. So that does 10 it. All right. Thank you, Kirk. And I think that 11 the staff may after the meeting is over, give you 12 some more specifics on that, too. Andy, do you want 13 to add anything? Go ahead.
14 ANDREW KUGLER: I did just want to mention 15 one thing. Every year the Plant is required to 16 issue a report. There's actually two reports that 17 would be of interest. One is the effluent release 18 report and that documents what effluents have been 19 released by the Plant - - the measurements and an 20 estimate of what that would mean in terms of doses.
21 And there's also a second report, the radiological 22 environmental monitoring report and Kirk mentioned, 23 they do sampling of fish, of soil, of water, things 24 like that and determine what is out there in the 25
35 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 environment. And again, I think all that 1
information is then combined to estimate a dose to 2
what's called a maximally exposed individual. A 3
theoretical person who is in the worst place all the 4
time and what their dose would be. And those doses 5
are well below the limits that we're talking about.
6 And we could get you information on those reports.
7 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thanks 8
Andy. Any other questions on the findings in the 9
draft Environmental Impact Statement? Okay.
10 Let's go on to severe accident mitigation 11 alternatives, another part of the draft 12 Environmental Impact Statement. And we have Mr.
13 Mark Rubin from the NRC staff who's going to 14 summarize those for us.
15 MARK RUBIN: Good afternoon. Shorter than 16 most of the other people here. Thank you. When 17 D.C. Cook was originally designed, it was designed 18 to a rigorous set of design basis accidents which 19 included both potential accidents plus failures plus 20 system failures that were considered extremely 21 unlikely in most cases, or possibly those that were 22 considered as possible but not too likely. So 23 there's a wide range of accidents the Plant was 24 originally designed for. A full spectrum from the 25
36 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 more likely to the very, very unlikely. Now this 1
has resulted in extensive safety systems being 2
incorporated into the Plant that's resulted in a 3
plant that meets our regulations and is a very safe 4
plant.
5 In the last several years, techniques have 6
been developed to assess very, very unlikely 7
hypothetical accidents that could involve multiple 8
failures and errors that could result in core damage 9
to the Plant and some releases to the public. These 10 are called severe accidents. The probability of 11 these severe accidents are so small that we use a 12 combination of mathematical models and probabilistic 13 risk assessment model techniques to allow us to 14 calculate the combination of failures that could 15 lead to these severe accidents. These are the types 16 of studies that are conducted to allow the staff to 17 conduct a severe accident mitigation alternatives 18 study. And going into this presentation, I just 19 want to comment that PRA's are being conducted for a 20 number of years and the techniques have been 21 developed and refined. And this isn't the first 22 time that a probabilistic risk assessment results 23 have been considered for D.C. Cook. All plants in 24 the US have conducted PRA studies. The results of 25
37 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 those studies have frequently been used to look for 1
ways to improve the plants and improve safety. And 2
so we're far down the road and PRA results have 3
previously already been used to look for, find and 4
implement improvements to the Plant to improve 5
safety.
6 We'll go on to the next slide, please.
7 The SAMA process involves a number of steps. First 8
of all, you have to characterize the overall plant 9
risk using these probabilistic risk assessments. We 10 call them PRA studies that are a combination of 11 mathematical and risk models of the Plant. Those 12 studies are used to identify potential improvements.
13 Sometimes their improvements in plant systems, 14 procedural steps, ways to improve the plant safety 15 with respect to the severe accident risk, which is 16 already very, very low at these plants.
17 The next step is to actually quantify 18 the risk reduction potential using these PRA methods 19 that would characterize both on-site and off-site 20 risks to the public and to the plant operating staff 21 on site and on-site costs. And also the 22 implementation costs that would be involved to 23 actually implement some of these improvements. So 24 what we tried to do here is to look at ways to 25
38 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 reduce the low severe accident risk at the Plant 1
even lower, what are the alternatives that are 2
available to do that, what are the potential costs 3
to achieve these small reductions in risk at the 4
Plant.
5 And the final step is to determine whether 6
implementation of any of these improvements is 7
required to support the license renewal process.
8 Next slide. Thank you.
9 The licensee provided a considerable 10 amount of technical work to support the staff 11 evaluation. There was a wide range of potential 12 improvements that were considered. They started out 13 with 194 candidate improvements. These include a 14 pretty broad range of potential enhancements and 15 improvements to the Plant that, as I said, has 16 already been subjected in the past to a careful 17 looking using PRA insights and techniques. But this 18 was a re-look. And they looked again and they 19 looked pretty broadly. These things included a 20 number of improvements that have been considered at 21 other plants going through license renewal. Other 22 SAMA evaluations that have been conducted, other 23 improvements for plants that are similar to theirs.
24 A screening process was used to go through this 25
39 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 large list to cull them down because a number of 1
them didn't really apply to this design at all. In 2
some cases, the improvement that was being 3
considered, had actually already been implemented in 4
one manner or another at the Plant previously.
5 So this larger number was culled down to a 6
set of 72 that was subjected to a more detailed 7
cost/benefit study where the risk technique was 8
refined a bit, the cost numbers were refined a bit 9
to try to truly find those elements where the 10 reduction in risk would be what we call cost 11 beneficial. Namely, the benefit received economic, 12 health, and so on, would be a benefit compared to 13 the cost to implement the change.
14 When this evaluation was completed by the 15 licensee, they had identified 16 actual plant 16 enhancements that were potentially cost beneficial.
17 And I say potential because at this stage, even 18 though the analysis had been refined, in some cases 19 it was optimistic, in some cases the calculation was 20 done with quite a bit of additional margin put on 21 it, namely, if the benefit was within a factor of -
22
- if the cost was in a factor to the benefit, they'd 23 go ahead and do it. What I mean by do it is put it 24 into this list of cost beneficial enhancements.
25
40 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Now, these are calculated independently.
1 Since they're in five groups, the reality in the 2
calculational sense is if one were to make a few of 3
these improvements, most of the calculational risk 4
would be realized and you would not be able, for 5
example, to sum all the individual benefits since 6
they fell into a discrete small number of groups.
7 When the evaluation was finished and the 8
cost beneficial enhancements had been identified, 9
these 16 items I mentioned, they fell into a number 10 of areas. Some involved such issues as improving 11 ventilation, cooling to rooms where the equipment in 12 it needed to be kept at a certain temperature, they 13 looked at ways to improve the diesel generators 14 reliability, they looked at ways to improve the 15 cooling of what's called seals of pumps so they 16 wouldn't overheat and result in some loss of fluid.
17 But when all these evaluations were 18 completed and the cost beneficial items were 19 identified, none of them were related to aging 20 related issues. Consequently, under the conditions 21 of license renewal rules, they're not candidates 22 that are required to be implemented as part of the 23 license renewal. However, as was done many times 24 in the past when uses of PRA's were utilized to 25
41 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 attempt to identify plant improvements, these 16 are 1
being considered by the licensee as part of their 2
corrective action program. And they're refining the 3
analysis and they'll be looking at what combination 4
of the improvements they believe are worthwhile for 5
amending in the Plant. And that concludes the 6
presentation.
7 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thank you, 8
Mark. Do we have any questions for Mark on the 9
severe accident mitigation alternatives? That 10 analysis that he just talked about? Yes, sir, and 11 if you don't mind, I'm going to call you Mike until 12 I hear your last name again, because I know I'd 13 probably mangle it. Mike?
14 MIKE POLUHANYO: Yes. I just have a 15 question about the auxiliary building. As you look 16 at the construction, the containments are very well 17 constructed and very safe. However, the auxiliary 18 building where the spent fuel pool is, would that be 19 able to survive a plane crash, for example? Is that 20 one of the alternatives that you look at? Have they 21 looked at that possibility? Ever since 9-11, you 22 know, I've been in there and I see that and that's a 23 concern for me, I guess. And then also, - - I mean, 24 for the rest of the workers as well as the local 25
42 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 citizen. If there were to be a plan to crash into 1
the auxiliary building where the spent fuel pool is, 2
that's not built quite as safe as the containments.
3 Have you looked at that?
4 MARK RUBIN: Well, the security issues are 5
under careful review, careful action by both the 6
licensee and by the NRC. And it's not a topic, 7
really, for this meeting. It would fall under the 8
purview of the continuing operational safety 9
consideration of the plant. And it would be under 10 the safety purview rather than the environmental 11 purview.
12 FACILITATOR CAMERON: So let me - - let me 13 just clarify that for Mike. One thing that you're 14 saying, Mark, is that in a SAMA evaluation, there 15 would be no evaluation of potential accidents or 16 incidents like that.
17 MARK RUBIN: That's correct.
18 FACILITATOR CAMERON: And, Andy, do you 19 want to repeat anything from which you've said at 20 the beginning about why security is not part of the 21 license renewal? Maybe you could just say that 22 again for Mike?
23 ANDREW KUGLER: Sure. What - - the 24 approach we've taken on issues such as security and 25
43 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 emergency planning, is that these programs are 1
continuously monitored and managed by the NRC 2
throughout the life of the plant. It's not 3
something that's going to be unique to license 4
renewal to the extended period of operation. So the 5
issues of security and the type of issue you raised, 6
those are being dealt with today in the wake of 9-11 7
through reviews by the staff in the security area.
8 Okay? There was one other thing I wanted 9
to mention. Kirk looked up some information in the 10 Environmental Impact Statement and the number for 11 the dose limit annually, is 25 millirem. That's the 12 correct number. So - - thank you.
13 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thank you, 14 Andy. Thank you, Mark. Any other questions? Yes, 15 sir. And just introduce yourself to us, please?
16 LOU MATHIAS: Well, I'm Lou Mathias. I 17 live here in Bridgman and I retired from the Cook 18 Plant. And I'm just wondering whether the NRC 19 thinks that the President is going to insist that 20 they open the Yucca Mountain facility to take care 21 of the spent fuel rods that are all over the 22 country. Do you think that will ever happen?
23 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thanks, Mr.
24 Mathias. Andy, do you want to sort of give us an 25
44 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 overview on that?
1 ANDREW KUGLER: The best way I can answer 2
that is this: The Commission has made a 3
determination and actually embodied it in a rule 4
that the Commission believes there will be a 5
repository available for spent fuel by the year 6
2025. And that there will be enough room in time to 7
store spent fuel from plants within 30 years after 8
the time that they cease operation. I don't want to 9
speculate on what the President might or might not 10 do. I really have no way to answer that question.
11 How it will come about at this point. One of the 12 things the Commission has documented in its reviews 13 and they go back and they review this rule 14 periodically, is that if something occurs that would 15 potentially change the conclusion that they made, 16 they would reinitiate the review. I don't know if 17 we've reached that point yet on Yucca Mountain. I 18 understand that there have been a number of things 19 going on recently. We're all aware, I think, or a 20 lot of people are aware of the recent court case 21 that struck down the EPA rule - - or at least 22 remanded it for further review. Don't know what the 23 outcome of that is going to be, so it's very hard 24 for us to predict. And all I can really say at this 25
45 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 point is the Commission did make a finding, it is 1
something that's suggestion to review if things 2
change. But at this point, what the rule states is 3
that there will - - we expect there will be a place 4
for the fuel - - some room by the year 2025 and 5
enough room by the time - - sometime after the 6
plants cease operating to store it all.
7 FACILITATOR CAMERON: And just to put that 8
in a little bit more perspective for you, Mr.
9 Mathias, that the - - the waste confidence rule 10 making that Andy is talking about is a generic 11 finding of the Commission that they think that there 12 will be a repository cited. Not necessarily the one 13 that's being considered at Yucca Mountain. And in 14 terms of the President's role, the President, in 15 terms of Yucca Mountain has already directed the 16 Department of Energy to file a license application 17 with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to site a 18 repository there. So the President's role is 19 finished now, and now if the Department of Energy 20 submits a license application to us, we need to 21 approve it. In other words, just like D.C. Cook 22 needs to meet our regulations to get license 23 renewal, the Department of Energy needs to meet our 24 regulations to site a repository. And that will be 25
46 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 the next step along the way.
1 Do you have any other questions on that?
2 All right. Anything - - any other questions? Okay.
3 Let's go to Bill Dam, again, who is the 4
environmental project manager and thank you, Mark, 5
SAMA presentation. Bill's going to tell us about 6
how to submit comments.
7 WILLIAM DAM: Thanks, Chip. First let me 8
turn to our conclusions that we found that the 9
impacts of license renewal are small in all areas.
10 We also concluded that the alternatives actions, 11 including the no action alternative, may have 12 environmental effects in at least some impact 13 categories that span the range of small, moderate to 14 even large significance.
15 Based on these results, our preliminary 16 recommendation is that operating the Donald C.
17 Cook Nuclear Power Plant for an additional 20 years, 18 that the environmental impacts would be small and 19 therefore, the option to renew the license should be 20 preserved for energy decision makers.
21 As I mentioned the NRC issued the draft 22 Environmental Impact Statement in September. So 23 what happens next? We have a 90-day comment period 24 which runs until December. After that, we will 25
47 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 review and disposition the comments we receive here 1
today, as well as any comments received by the 2
comment period in December and we'll modify the 3
draft Environmental Impact Statement that we've got 4
available today and we'll prepare the final 5
supplement to the Environmental Impact Statement.
6 And we expect to provide that by May of 2005.
7 I want to let you know how you can get 8
contact information. You can get a hold of me at 9
this phone number, 800-368-5642, extension 4014. We 10 also have the documents available at two local 11 public libraries. One is the Bridgman Public 12 Library right down the street at 4460 Lake Street.
13 And the other one is in St. Joseph at the Maude 14 Preston Palenske Memorial Library at 500 Market 15 Street. So the documents are available there.
16 They're also available on our NRC website at this 17 address. If you have comments in addition to 18 today's meeting that we're going to include in our 19 impact statement, we also have ways - - three ways 20 that you can provide those comments. One is by 21 writing to us at this address. The second way is if 22 you happen to be in the Rockville, Maryland area, 23 we'd be happy to meet with you at our office. And 24 the third way is by e-mail. We've set up a special 25
48 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 e-mail address just to receive your comments. And 1
that address is CookEIS@nrc.gov.
2 All comments will be collected and 3
considered and we'll respond to those comments. I 4
want to take time to thank you for attending this 5
meeting. You attention has been very valuable to us 6
in this process. And please take brochures in the 7
back. We brought a lot. We would like to leave 8
them here rather than take them back with us. And 9
we have quite a few single copies of the draft 10 Environmental Impact Statement we'd be happy to 11 provide you. Also, we'd appreciate your filling out 12 the feedback form. That's very important to us to 13 help us in our future meetings. And I'll turn the 14 meeting back over to Chip. Thank you very much.
15 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thanks, Bill.
16 Well, you've heard - - hear a lot of information 17 from us. And now it's our opportunity to listen to 18 some of the comments that you might want to give us 19 in regard to the license renewal process. And first 20 of all we're going to go to American Electric Power, 21 Mr. Mano Nazar who is going to give us their 22 perspective, their vision in terms of license 23 renewal and Mr. Nazar is the Chief Nuclear Officer 24 of AEP and also the Senior Vice President. Mr.
25
49 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Nazar?
1 MANO NAZAR: Thank you very much. Can I 2
use your microphone?
3 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Yes, absolutely.
4 MANO NAZAR: Feel more comfortable this 5
way. It's great to be here. Thanks for coming.
6 Members of the public, the NRC members and we 7
appreciate you taking time from busy schedule to be 8
here. We want to share with you a little bit from 9
our perspective from American Electric Power. As it 10 was said, I'm Mano Nazar. I'm Chief Nuclear 11 Officer. The Site Vice President and Plant Mangers, 12 they directly report to me, including Vice President 13 of the engineering. I have worked in this industry 14 for 24 years at several power plants, Duke Energy 15 which is in southern part of country in Carolinas, 16 and then Nuclear Management Company which is in 17 Midwest. I was responsible for four - - operation 18 of four different plants prior to joining AEP. Next 19 slide, please?
20 I want to share with you that before we 21 actually applied and submitted an application, 22 internally, we completed a lot of self-assessment to 23 make sure that we as utility, we were satisfied with 24 our operation and continuous operation of the Cook 25
50 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 before we applied for license renewal. The project, 1
as I mentioned, started 2001, including the self-2 assessments that we conducted to make sure the 3
effectiveness of our policies, programs and 4
procedures and insure ourselves that we could 5
continue to operate the facility for additional 20 6
years. As it was indicated, Cook is rivaled today 7
in the area of energy supply with respect to the 8
safe, low-cost, reliable and environmentally 9
friendly. The low cost, from that aspect, again, 10 the customer is benefitting from that aspect of 11 that.
12 November 2003, as you heard, that we 13 submitted our application to the NRC for their 14 review, and obviously as part of the process, on 15 that flow-chart you notice, the part that was 16 mentioned in March 2004, was the first visit at the 17 site and public meeting and that, basically, kind of 18 was valuable for the community to voice their 19 opinion and we obviously took all of those feedback 20 into account.
21 And you heard that publication of the 22 Generic Environmental Impact Statement in September 23 of 2004, and that's the draft version at this point.
24 I want to take a few minutes to just 25
51 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 describe how we operate our facility. And I think 1
that probably benefits with respect to your 2
understanding of why it's safe to continue operation 3
of the Cook Nuclear Power Plant for additional 20 4
years. Next slide, please 5
I want to show you kind of a visual image 6
of our core values, which is based on prevention, 7
detection and correction. Which is a little bit 8
different than probably other industries. Our core 9
values, our program, procedures, the way we operate 10 the plant, is based on the foundation of prevention.
11 And using the solid detection process to make sure 12 that we're staying ahead of the issues. In order to 13 do that, it requires a lot of, lot of work on the 14 part of operating company to insure that we're 15 staying a head of the issues and preventing the 16 failures before the failures occur.
17 The license renewal process follows that 18 particular core value that we have established at 19 all sites, for our company, American Electric Power, 20 to make sure that we are operating the facility in 21 the safe, reliable manner while we're caring for 22 employees and environment and community. That's the 23 important aspect of our operation. Obviously, you 24 heard from the members of the NRC that the self-25
52 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 assessment - - independent assessment, however, 1
showed that we have established that and our 2
programs has been established such that they can 3
satisfy that core value of the prevention.
4 As a result of that independent self 5
assessment, obviously, you heard that no major 6
issues with respect to the environmental aspect of 7
our application including safety aspect of that have 8
been identified. And as I mentioned in our 9
information, core value is to operate our plant 10 safely, be reliable while we're caring for the 11 community. And doing that, we again, in 12 preventative mode, doing a lot of activities to make 13 sure that we are protecting the environment. Next 14 slide please?
15 What's left for us to do? Obviously, 16 we're going to continue working very closely with 17 the project team - - you met most of them - - to 18 make sure that any enhancements, any areas that can 19 help us, we going to enhance our core values, that 20 we continuously looking for those and improving the 21 operation of our facility.
22 Public is always welcome to contact us 23 directly. And we constantly sending out newsletters 24 to the community and meeting with the community in 25
53 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 different forms and different shapes so to make sure 1
that the information is widely and openly 2
communicated with the members of the community.
3 License renewal definitely is the right 4
thing for Cook, for this community and for American 5
Electric Power. Looking forward to the NRC's 6
decision next year, as you saw that's going to be 7
made next year. We're really don't expect any major 8
barriers at this point. We feel comfortable that we 9
can overcome some minor enhancements and issues that 10 may come out of - - out of the interfaces and 11 reviews that are taking place at this point. And 12 we're looking forward to operating our facility for 13 an additional 20 years.
14 With respect to the questions that came up 15 and I appreciate the question about the Yucca 16 Mountain. I just want to also mention in addition 17 to the NRC's effort, also, the industry's goal to be 18 directly involved with some of those decisions. And 19 we are not limiting our effort just to the Yucca 20 Mountain. There are some additional efforts in - -
21 at least, at work at this point with respect to some 22 of the other facilities that we are working on to 23 make sure that if Yucca Mountain doesn't come, you 24 know, to reality in a timely manner, that we are 25
54 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 looking at some other alternatives. And we are 1
working as industry. A lot of involvement from the 2
Nuclear Energy Institute, the NEI, and also, like I 3
said, from the utilities. There are obviously 4
roughly about 63 plants involved with that and we 5
need that kind of facility for the longer term 6
operation of our facilities and we are working 7
together to make that happen.
8 Any question that I can address from the 9
American Electric Power side?
10 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thank you 11 very much, Mr. Nazar. Mr. Gast? Mr. John Gast, who 12 is supervisor here in Lake Township. And I should 13 just add our thanks for the use of this great 14 facility, to Mr. Gast.
15 JOHN GAST: Good afternoon. I'd like to 16 welcome you to our Township facility here on behalf 17 of our Township Board of Trustees. As stated, I am 18 John Gast. I am the Supervisor of Lake Township. I 19 am a lifetime resident of the community of Lake 20 Township and currently hold that position as 21 supervisor. I have recently retired from a 26-year 22 career in law enforcement. I have worked closely 23 during that time with the Cook Nuclear personnel 24 over many years. The Plant and its employees and 25
55 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 management have been great community partners and 1
support many of our non-profit organizations in the 2
area. The economic impact of Cook in this area, has 3
afforded our citizens economic stability and growth 4
as well as the Township's single largest employer, 5
and I believe our county's third-largest employer.
6 The Township enjoys a water facility along 7
with a sanitary water utility throughout the 8
Township and one of the lowest tax millage in the 9
county. Township residents also enjoy a wide range 10 of services provided at no additional cost.
11 Before 9-11, the Cook Plant Visitor's 12 Center was one of the Township's destination 13 locations, as well as an opportunity for visitors 14 and education. However, after the 9-11 event, that 15 facility has been minimized to the public due to 16 security concerns. The facility was a showcase for 17 our community. The plant owners have always 18 promoted safety and AEP is no exception to that.
19 Operating with the safety of the public as a top 20 priority and being stewards of our local 21 environment. I have personally had no negative 22 communications involving the relicensing of this 23 plant and I am here today to support the relicensing 24 effort into the year 2034 and 2037. Thank you.
25
56 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thank you, 1
Mr. Gast. Our next speaker/commenter is Mr. Kevin 2
Ivers, who is Superintendent of Bridgman Public 3
Schools. Mr. Ivers?
4 KEVIN IVERS: Thank you and good 5
afternoon. I've also been employed by the Bridgman 6
Public Schools for the past eight years. The school 7
district has had a positive working relationship 8
with D.C. Cook. We've shared - -they've shared 9
their resources with us to enhance the education of 10 our students in our district as well as throughout 11 Berrien County. D.C. Cook employees and their 12 families who reside in our community are important 13 to our school district. Many serve as advisors and 14 coaches on our athletic teams and other areas. The 15 property tax revenues that are generated not only 16 benefit our school district, but all public school 17 districts throughout Michigan.
18 D.C. Cook has been a good neighbor and we 19 fully support their process and their application 20 for license renewal. Thank you.
21 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Thank you, Mr.
22 Ivers. Next we're going to go to Ms. Anna Murphy.
23 Anna. And Anna is United Way.
24 ANNA MURPHY: Good afternoon. United Way 25
57 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 has evolved over the past few years to become more 1
than just a fundraiser. We've becomes advocates, 2
facilitators and conveners. All of these roles that 3
we can play towards creating community impact. We 4
believe that the movement towards creating community 5
impact or community changes can be achieved because 6
of partners such as AEP. We have a long-standing 7
history with AEP. AEP partners with United Way by 8
providing teams for the annual Days of Caring, Make 9
A Difference, which consists of over -- a total of 10 1,600 volunteers that leverage over $230,000 of 11 volunteer labor in our community. AEP contributes 12 to the annual campaign by raising well over $200,000 13 through both employee and corporate contributions, 14 making it the second largest campaign in our 15 community and a United Way Hall of Fame Company 16 since 1998.
17 Also, we have been very fortunate over the 18 past years to have representation from AEP on our 19 Board of Directors as well as at the committee 20 levels. The impact is huge, and with AEP's 21 commitment, United Way and it's partners were able 22 to help people over 70,000 times last year. That's 23 one in four lives. Thank you, AEP, for being here, 24 as United Way continues to evolve to create 25
58 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 sustainable changes in our community.
1 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Thank you very much, 2
Anna. And we're going to hear from Mr. Greg Koroch 3
now who is with Lake Michigan College.
4 GREG KOROCH: Thank you. First of all, 5
I'd like to say that I think today - - the results 6
of today's hearings really confirms what we've 7
always believed about Cook Nuclear Plan, is they 8
really have an outstanding team of people who are 9
really dedicated to helping make this place a great 10 place to call home. So thank you, first of all, for 11 that.
12 Second of all, I want to say that 13 throughout the years, Cook and AEP have really been 14 outstanding corporate partners. We commend them, 15 first for their work and their commitment to 16 education and training. They have demonstrated this 17 on a number of fronts throughout the years. They 18 have hosted on-site college open houses which more 19 than 100 cook employees attended. We have worked 20 with them to conduct work key profiles for 21 maintenance technicians, we've piloted computer and 22 electronics training classes with them. Members of 23 the college staff and Cook meet monthly to discuss 24 continuing education classes and discuss things like 25
59 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 classes to upgrade skills of staff with new 1
technology degree programs, team building programs, 2
technical lighting classes, OSHA and safety classes.
3 We applaud Cook's staff for their work in 4
employee education. Again, I think the things that 5
we see today really support that. Also, I think 6
the work that we do with them really - - and the 7
advice they provide us helps improve our programs 8
across the board. All of our training programs we 9
provide to other companies as well.
10 Finally, I'd like to acknowledge Cook and 11 AEP as first-rate corporate citizens. I'm pleased 12 that they've established an adult scholarship at the 13 college for students pursuing technical and 14 industrial manufacturing disciplines. Notably, they 15 have, through that scholarship are targeting 16 underemployed workers to help them gain the 17 technical and academic skills they need to succeed 18 in the high wage and high skill jobs in Southwest 19 Michigan. So again, we thank Cook for their support 20 and we've enjoyed working with them over the years.
21 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Thanks, Mr. Koroch.
22 We're going to hear from Mr. Buzz Calvert at this 23 point and Mr. Calvert is the President of the Board, 24 I believe, for the Volunteer Center of Southwest 25
60 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Michigan. All right.
1 H. E. "BUZZ" CALVERT: Good afternoon 2
everybody. It's a pleasure to have the opportunity 3
to talk about one of our good friends and good 4
neighbors and that's our friends at Cook. They live 5
in our communities, they're volunteers, they work in 6
our schools, and of course, that's what the 7
Volunteer Center is all about. We have offices in 8
Niles and St. Joseph, Michigan. Our primary role is 9
to serve the volunteer in our community, but we also 10 serve over 200 non-profits in our community that 11 support all of those components that I just 12 mentioned to you.
13 Cook's been a good friend to us. They've 14 provided us with an outstanding board member, about 15 five years ago. Mr. Bill Shalk, who's helped with 16 our marketing campaigns throughout the county, 17 arranged for printing of posters when we've been a 18 little low on our budgets from time to time. And 19 certainly, we want to thank Cook for all of the 20 support they've given to provide mentors for the 21 various mentoring initiatives around our county, 22 including opening up the Cook Information Center on 23 two different years to provide education and fund 24 and opportunity to match mentors with kids. And 25
61 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 that was certainly meaningful for a lot of kids in 1
our community. We also know that they are involved 2
with a lot of other fundraisers. We've heard about 3
a couple of those today. One of our initiatives is 4
called the Human Race. And it involves volunteers 5
that support nonprofit agencies out on the roads of 6
Berrien County and Cook has been good about 7
providing posters for support of that race and also 8
a few plotters in addition to that. So we're really 9
thankful for that.
10 One of the Volunteer Center's primary 11 products is called the "Wish Book". The "Wish Book" 12 is an opportunity wherein those who have services or 13 goods to give are matched with those who have a need 14 in those areas. And Cook has been outstanding about 15 covering the cost of our "Wish Book" through grants 16 on at least one occasion.
17 In closing, I'd just like to say thank 18 you, Cook and AEP for being good neighbors in our 19 community and for supporting volunteerism and we 20 look forward to working with you for many years to 21 come. Thanks.
22 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thank you, 23 Mr. Calvert. Our next speaker is Mr. Mike Green 24 from the Harbor Habitat for Humanity. Mr. Green?
25
62 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MIKE GREEN: Thank you and I also - - I'm 1
Mike Green. I'm Executive Director of Harbor 2
Habitat. It's a small, non-profit organization in 3
Benton Harbor, Michigan. And we build houses for 4
people who need them. I want to echo the comments 5
by Greg Koroch at LMC, that I'm really encouraged at 6
the process that you've undertaken in order to renew 7
the license. I was also particularly pleased to see 8
the team expertise slide that talked about the focus 9
on the ecology, the hydrology and the socioeconomic 10 and environmental justice issues related to the 11 community and the impact that this institution has 12 on our world. I'm glad that somebody is paying 13 attention to that and I'm glad that I had an 14 opportunity today to hear that and hear information 15 about how you're going about this process. It was 16 very educational for me.
17 The Cook Nuclear Plant and its employees 18 have been a very important part of our organization.
19 We started as a small, non-profit in 1996, when in 20 our community, there had been no permits given for 21 single-family construction of houses, - - new 22 construction - - in over 25 years. And that first 23 year, in 1996, when we started building houses, the 24
- - the employees of Cook and AEP donated some - -
25
63 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 some heat pumps for us and it really got us started.
1 And it's really - - a great relationship has grown 2
from that. Bob Story, who was an employee at AEP, 3
is our Board President now. And we've had some just 4
wonderful success over the years.
5 This year, we built four houses. And AEP 6
and the Cook Plant have been leaders in our efforts 7
to bring corporate sponsors to the table to help 8
eradicate substandard housing in our community. And 9
I'm very pleased to say that AEP did support us by 10 constructing one house and next year, President 11 Jimmy Carter is coming to our community and is going 12 to help us as we focus on more construction. And I 13 understand that the Cook Plant is committed to 14 sponsorship levels of that also.
15 The important thing that I want to say 16 today is that the employees and the leadership at 17 Cook and AEP have been tremendous sponsors and 18 corporate sponsors and tremendous supporters of our 19 efforts in our community. And I just can't say 20 enough for the expertise that those employees bring 21 to us. The people who want to live and live in our 22 homes want a quality product and the employees at 23 AEP know how to build a house. They know their 24 jobs well at the Cook Plant, but they also know how 25
64 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 to do other things. And it's just great to have 1
leadership there that can really enhance our ability 2
to get the job done and get it done well.
3 But particularly, the leadership at the 4
organization really drives the culture and the 5
volunteer culture at Cook and I think some of the 6
other non-profits and the organizations that have 7
spoken before me have already said that. And 8
there's a very valuable resource and I think it goes 9
without saying that the employees of Cook are really 10 leaders and really drive change in our community and 11 it's very valuable to have them in our community.
12 So I do support the license renewal. We 13 do have an office located in downtown Benton Harbor 14 which is a distressed city in our county. And it is 15 named AEP Community Center because that facility was 16 fully funded and constructed by the employees of 17 Cook Nuclear Plant. That made a public statement to 18 our community that as an organization we were there 19 to stay and we were going to have an impact over the 20 long term. And I really appreciate the support that 21 Cook and the employees of that organization have 22 given to us in providing the visual statement to our 23 community and it helped us tremendously. So I want 24 to thank you all for that.
25
65 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 And so I do support the license renewal 1
and I hope that all goes well with the process.
2 Thank you.
3 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thank you, 4
Mr. Green for those remarks. That's our last 5
speaking for this afternoon. And we're going to be 6
back tonight at seven for another meeting and an 7
open house beginning at six. And I would just thank 8
you all for coming out and I'm going to ask Andy 9
Kugler to just say a few words to close this 10 afternoon's meeting for us. Andy?
11 ANDREW KUGLER: Well, mainly, I just want 12 to say thank you all for coming out. Appreciate you 13 taking the time to be here. I hope that the 14 information we provided will help you and that it 15 gives you something that you can use. If you do 16 have any comments beyond the scope of this meeting, 17 there are ways, as mentioned in the slides, for you 18 to provide us with those comments, and we would 19 encourage you to do that. We - - we want to do the 20 best job we can and we'd like to get your input.
21 And as Bill mentioned, if you could fill 22 out a meeting feed-back form, we'd appreciate that 23 as well. We try and do better each time we do these 24 meetings, and we're always looking for ideas on how 25
66 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 to go about doing that. So we'd appreciate that.
1 And with that, again, thank you for being here.
2 FACILITATOR CAMERON: One more thing.
3 ANDREW KUGLER: Oh, Chip has something 4
more to say.
5 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Just one last 6
comment which - - I want to make sure that - - is it 7
Mr. Poluhanyo?
8 MIKE POLUHANYO: Yes. My name is Mike 9
Poluhanyo. Just a quick comment so this is 10 unplanned. So - - I've been a worker at the Cook 11 Plant for many outages in past years and some of 12 those have been full time and stuff. And so I just 13 want to say the Cook Plant has been a very good 14 employer and a good neighbor also, on behalf of the 15 citizens of Berrien County and they provide 16 employment for not only our local citizens, but a 17 lot of citizens from out of town. And we do help 18 out the local economy because as an example, our 19 last night - - the night after we were laid off, all 20 of us got together and we had, like, dinner at a 21 local restaurant. And before everybody goes back to 22 their separate, other states and stuff. So they've 23 been a good employer and it helps out the local 24 economy a lot. So thanks. And we also do wish 25
67 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 success on the renewal, too.
1 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Great. Thank you.
2 Let me make sure that - - anybody else want to 3
comment before we close? Okay. Thank you very 4
much.
5 (At 3:02 p.m., public meeting concluded) 6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25