ML061840033
| ML061840033 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png |
| Issue date: | 06/07/2006 |
| From: | NRC/NRR/ADRO/DLR/REBB |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NRC-1072 | |
| Download: ML061840033 (117) | |
Text
Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Title:
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant Public Meeting: Afternoon Session Docket Number:
(050-00271)
Location:
Brattleboro, Vermont Date:
Wednesday, June 7, 2006 Work Order No.:
NRC-1072 Pages 1-116 NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC.
Court Reporters and Transcribers 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 234-4433
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 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 1
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
+ + + + +
3 PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING 4
FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, 5
AFTERNOON SESSION 7
+ + + + +
8 WEDNESDAY 9
JUNE 7, 2006 10
+ + + + +
11 BRATTLEBORO, VERMONT 12
+ + + + +
13 The Public Meeting was convened at the 14 Latchis Theater at 50 Main Street in Brattleboro, 15 Vermont, at 1:30 p.m., F. "Chip" Cameron, Facilitator, 16 presiding.
17 NRC STAFF PARTICIPATING:
18 F. "CHIP" CAMERON 19 RANI FRANOVICH 20 RICHARD EMCH 21 ERIC BENNER 22 FRANK GILLESPIE 23 24 25
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 SPEAKERS:
1 BETH ADAMS 2
SHAWN BANFIELD 3
JOHN BLOCK 4
CAROL BOYER 5
CORA BROOKS 6
BILL BURTON 7
ROBERT ENGLISH 9
ANN ELIZABETH HOWES 10 SARAH KOTKOV 11 DAN MACARTHUR 12 DAVID MCELWEE 13 EVAN MULHOLLAND 14 JILL NEITLICH 15 NANCY NELKIN 16 JANE NEWTON 17 DEBRA REGER 18 GARY SACHS 19 RAY SHADIS 20 SALLY SHAW 21 CHRIS WILLIAMS 22 MEGAN 23 24 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 P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 1
1:35 p.m.
2 MR. CAMERON: Good afternoon, everybody.
3 If we could ask you all to take your seats and we'll 4
get started with this afternoon's meeting.
5 Okay, Ray, Evan, would you like to join us 6
down here? Are we going to have a lot of continuing 7
feedback with this thing? If we do, let's try to fix 8
it. It seems like there is a lot of feedback.
9
- Again, good afternoon and welcome 10 everybody. My name is Chip Cameron, I'm the Special 11 Counsel for Public Liaison at the Nuclear Regulatory 12 Commission, which we'll be referring to as the NRC, 13 today.
14 And it's my pleasure to serve as your 15 Facilitator for today's meeting. And our subject 16 today is the environmental review that the NRC 17 conducts as part of its evaluation of a license 18 application that we received from the Entergy Company 19 to renew the operating license for the Vermont Yankee 20 Reactor.
21 And I just wanted to cover three items of 22 meeting process for you, very quickly, before we get 23 to the substance of our discussions today. And I'd 24 like to talk a little bit about what the format for 25
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 the meeting is. Secondly, some simple ground rules 1
for running the meeting, and, lastly, I'd just like to 2
introduce the NRC staff who are going to be speaking 3
to you today.
4 In terms of format, we're going to start 5
out with some brief NRC presentations, to give you 6
some background on the license renewal process. What 7
we look at, what we evaluate in making a decision 8
about whether to renew a license for a reactor.
9 And we'll have time for some brief 10 questions after those presentations on the license 11 renewal process, to make sure that you understand it 12 before we go to the primary purpose of today's 13 meeting, which is to hear from all of you on this 14 process.
15 This meeting, as the NRC staff will tell 16 you, is a scoping meeting. That's a term that's used 17 in connection with the preparation of environmental 18 impact statements.
19 And, basically, what we would like to hear 20 from all of you on, is what issues should be looked 21 at, as the NRC prepares the draft environmental impact 22 statement. What methodology should be used? What 23 alternatives?
24 And we're looking forward to hearing from 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 you on that today. And we are taking written comments 1
on these issues, and the staff will tell you how to 2
submit written comments, but we wanted to be here with 3
you in person today to talk with you and to listen to 4
you.
5 In terms of ground rules, they're pretty 6
simple. When you do speak, please introduce yourself 7
to us and give us an affiliation, if you're affiliated 8
with a group.
9 If that's appropriate, tell us that. And 10 I would ask that only one person speak at a time.
11 Most importantly, so we can give our full attention to 12 whomever has the floor at the moment.
13 Also, so that our Court Reporter, Pete 14 Holland, up here, can get a clean transcript. So that 15 he knows who is talking. That transcript is the 16 public record of this meeting.
17 It's our record of the comments and it's 18 your record of what was said here this afternoon. And 19 that will be available to anybody who wants it.
20 I would ask everybody to try to be brief, 21 so that we can give everyone an opportunity to talk 22 this afternoon. And I'm asking everybody to follow a 23 five minute guideline, when they come up here to the 24 podium to give us their comments.
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 If you could limit it to five minutes, 1
that would be helpful, and when it gets close to five 2
minutes I may ask you to summarize your comments for 3
us, so that we can go on to the next person.
4 Five minutes may not seem like a lot of 5
time, but it does accomplish a number of important 6
things. One, it's usually enough time for people to 7
summarize their main points that they want us to hear.
8 Secondly, it alerts us to issues before 9
written comments come in, so that we can start working 10 on those issues right away. And, lastly, it alerts 11 everybody in the audience, in the community, to what 12 some of the concerns are that people have with the 13 renewal application.
14 So, we'll be following that five-minute 15 rule. There is an ability to follow up with more 16 extensive comments in writing. There's also an 17 ability to talk to the NRC staff, who are here from 18 our Headquarters Office and from Region, after the 19 meeting.
20 And we'll also be giving you some contact 21 information so that you can contact people, from the 22 NRC staff, if you have concerns or questions.
23 And I guess, finally, I just would ask all 24 of us, everyone, to just extend courtesy to everybody 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 else. We may hear different opinions on the issues, 1
different opinions from the ones that we hold today.
2 And I would just ask everybody to respect 3
those opinions. In terms of the NRC speakers, we're 4
going to start out this afternoon with an overview of 5
the license renewal process.
6 And we're going to have Rani Franovich, 7
who is right here, to start out for us. And she's the 8
Chief of the Environmental Projects Branch, within the 9
License Renewal Program.
10 And Rani and her staff manage the 11 Environmental Review for all License Renewal 12 Applications, including this one for Vermont Yankee.
13 And Rani has been with the NRC for 14 14 years, in a number of positions and areas of 15 responsibility. She was a Resident Inspector, these 16 are the NRC staff who are at every reactor that we 17 licensed throughout the country, to make sure that NRC 18 regulations are complied with.
19 She also was a Project Manager on the 20 Safety Review for several plants, I believe, that came 21 in for license renewal. She was also the Coordinator 22 of Reactor Enforcement, which was a position that 23 ensured that compliance steps were taken against 24 companies that may have violated the regulations.
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
- And, in terms of her educational 1
background, she has a Bachelor's Degree and a Master's 2
Degree from Virginia Tech. And the Master's Degree 3
was in Industrial and Systems Engineering.
4 And after Rani is done, we're going to go 5
right to Mr. Rich Emch, who is right over here. And 6
Richard is the Project Manager for the Environmental 7
Review for the Vermont Yankee License Renewal 8
Application.
9 And he'll be talking about the specifics 10 of the Environmental Review, and how to submit 11 comments. And Rich is an old hand at the NRC. He's 12 been with us for 32 years, and a lot of different 13 positions, mostly related to radiological health and 14 protection.
15 And his background is in Health Physics.
16 He has a Bachelor's in Physics from Louisiana Tech 17 University, and a Master's in Health Physics from the 18 Georgia Institute of Technology.
19 And Rani is going to introduce a number of 20 people, but I just wanted to introduce two people 21 before we get started.
22 One is Eric Benner. And Eric is the, is 23 a Branch Chief of the Branch that does the technical 24 review of the environmental issues that are in the 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 Environmental Impact Statement. And he'll be talking 1
to us tonight and I'll give him a full introduction at 2
that time.
3 And, also, we have Mr. Frank Gillespie 4
here. He is a Senior NRC Manager. Frank is the 5
Division Director of the Division of License Renewal 6
at the NRC in our Office of Nuclear Reactor 7
Regulation.
8 And I just would thank you all for being 9
here to help us with this decision. Rani.
10 MS. FRANOVICH: Thank you, Chip. You guys, 11 can everyone hear me? Is this better? Alright.
12 Thank you, Chip. I just wanted to open up the meeting 13 by thanking you all for coming here.
14 It's nasty weather outside and I
15 understand Vermont has had quite a bit of that 16 recently, and so I'm sorry we couldn't arrange for a 17 prettier day for the meeting, but we're really glad 18 you took the time out of your busy schedules to come 19 and talk with us today.
20 I hope the information that we provide 21 will help you understand the process we will be going 22 through in renewing the application for renewal for 23 Vermont Yankee.
24 And help you understand the role that you 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 can play in helping us to make sure that the 1
Environmental Impact Statement we prepare for Vermont 2
Yankee License Renewal, is complete and accurate.
3 Next slide, please, Sam. I'd like to 4
start off by briefly going over the purpose of today's 5
meeting. We'll explain the NRC's license renewal 6
process for nuclear power plants, with emphasis on the 7
environmental review process.
8 And we'll talk about the typical -- is 9
this better? Okay. We'll talk about the typical 10 areas included in the scope of our review. We'll also 11 share with you the License Renewal Review Schedule.
12 And really the most important part of 13 today's meeting, is to receive any comments that you 14 have on the scope of our review. They will also give 15 you some information about how you can submit comments 16 to us, outside of this meeting.
17 At the conclusion of the staff's 18 presentation, we will be happy to answer questions and 19 receive comments that you may have on the process and 20 the scope of our review.
21 However, I must ask you to limit your 22 participation to questions only, and hold your 23 comments until the appropriate time during today's 24 meeting.
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 Once all questions are answered, we can 1
begin receiving any comments that you have on the 2
scope of our Environmental Review. Next slide, 3
please.
4 Before I get into a discussion of the 5
License Renewal Process, I'd like to take a minute to 6
talk about the NRC in terms of what we do and what our 7
mission is.
8 The Atomic Energy Act is the legislation 9
that authorizes the NRC to issue operating licenses.
10 The Atomic Energy Act provides for a 40-year license 11 term for power reactors.
12 This 40-year term is based primarily on 13 economic considerations and anti-trust factors, not on 14 safety limitations of the plant. The Atomic Energy 15 Act also authorizes the NRC to regulate civilian use 16 of nuclear materials in the United States.
17 In exercising that authority, the NRC's 18 mission is three-fold. To ensure adequate protection 19 of public health and safety. To promote the common 20 defense and security, and to protect the environment.
21 The NRC accomplishes its mission through 22 a combination of regulatory programs and processes, 23 such as conducting inspections, issuing enforcement 24
- actions, assessing Licensee performance, and 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 evaluating operating experience from nuclear plants 1
across the country and internationally. The 2
regulations that the NRC enforces are contained in 3
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, which is 4
commonly referred to as 10 CFR. Next slide, please.
5 As I've mentioned, the Atomic Energy Act 6
provides for a 40-year license term for power 7
reactors. Our regulations also include provisions for 8
extending plant operation for up to an additional 20 9
years.
10 For Vermont Yankee the operating license 11 will expire March 21st, 2012. Entergy has requested 12 license renewal for Vermont Yankee. As part of the 13 NRC's review of the License Renewal Application, we 14 will perform an environmental review to look at the 15 impacts on the environment of an additional 20 years 16 of operation.
17 The purpose of this meeting is to give you 18 information about the process, and to seek your input 19 on what issues we should consider, within the scope of 20 our review. Next slide, please.
21 NRC's License Renewal Review is similar to 22 the original licensing processes, in that it involves 23 two parts. An Environmental Review and a safety 24 review. This slide really gives a big picture 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 overview of the License Renewal Process, which 1
involves these two parallel paths. I'm going to 2
briefly describe how these two review processes work, 3
starting with the safety review. Next slide, please.
4 Two guiding principles form the basis of 5
the NRC's approach in performing its safety review.
6 The first principle is that the current regulatory 7
process is adequate to ensure that the licensing basis 8
of all currently operating plants provides and 9
maintains an acceptable level of safety, with the 10 possible exception of the effects of aging on certain 11 structures, systems and components.
12 The second principle is that the current 13 plant-specific licensing basis must be maintained 14 during the renewal term, in the same manner, and to 15 the same extent, as during the original license term.
16 Next slide, please. You might ask what 17 does the safety review consider? For license renewal, 18 the safety review focuses on aging management of 19
- systems, structures and components, which are 20 important to safety, as determined by the license 21 renewal scoping criteria, contained in 10 CFR, Part 5.
22 The license renewal safety review does not 23 assess current operational issues, such as emergency 24 planning and safety performance. The NRC monitors and 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 provides regulatory oversight of these issues on an 1
ongoing basis, under the current operation license.
2 Because the NRC is addressing these current operating 3
issues, on a continuing basis, we do not re-evaluate 4
them in license renewal. Next slide, please.
5 As I have mentioned, the license renewal 6
safety review focuses on plant aging. And the 7
programs that the Licensee has already implemented, or 8
will implement, to manage the effects of aging.
9 Let me introduce Mr. Johnny Eads, the 10 Safety Project Manager. Thank you, Johnny. Johnny is 11 in charge of the staff's safety review. The safety 12 review involves the NRC staff's evaluation of 13 technical information that's contained in the License 14 Renewal Application.
15 This is referred to as the Safety 16 Evaluation. The NRC staff also conducts audits as 17 part of its Safety Evaluation. There's a team of 18 about 30 NRC Technical Reviewers and Contractors who 19 are conducting the Safety Evaluation at this time.
20 The Safety Review also includes plant 21 inspections. The inspections are conducted by a team 22 of Inspectors, from both Headquarters and the NRC's 23 Region 1 Office in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
24 A Representative from Inspection Program 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 is here today. The Resident Inspector of Vermont 1
Yankee is Beth Sienel. Beth, thank you. As Chip 2
mentioned, the Inspectors work at the plant 40 hours4.62963e-4 days <br />0.0111 hours <br />6.613757e-5 weeks <br />1.522e-5 months <br /> 3
a week. They live in the community, and they are the 4
eyes and the ears of the NRC.
5 We have at least two, Nuclear Regulatory 6
Commission Inspectors at every plant in the United 7
States. The results of the inspections are documented 8
in separate inspection reports.
9 The staff documents the results of its 10 review in a safety evaluation report. That report is 11 then independently reviewed by the Advisory Committee 12 on Reactor Safeguards or the ACRS.
13 The ACRS is a group of nationally-14 recognized technical experts that serve as a 15 consulting body to the Commission. They review each 16 License Renewal Application and Safety Evaluation 17 Report.
18 They form their own conclusions and 19 recommendations on the requested action, and they 20 report those conclusions and recommendations directly 21 to the Commission. Next slide, please.
22 This slide illustrates how these various 23 activities make up the Safety Review Process. I'd 24 like to point out that these hexagons, the yellow 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 hexagons on this slide, represent opportunities for 1
public participation. Also, the staff will present 2
the results of the Safety Review, to the ACRS, and 3
that presentation will be open to the public.
4 Next slide, please. The second part of 5
the review process involves an Environmental Review 6
with scoping activities and the development of an 7
Environmental Impact Statement.
8 As I have said, we're here today to 9
receive your comments on the scope of that review.
10 We'll consider any comments on the scope that we 11 receive at this meeting, or in written comments.
12 Then, in December of this year, we expect 13 to issue the draft Environmental Impact Statement, for 14 comment. Next slide. So, the final Agency decision 15 on whether or not to issue a renewed license, depends 16 on several inputs.
17 Inspection Reports and a confirmatory 18 letter from the Region 1 Administrator. Conclusions 19 and recommendations of the ACRS, which are documented 20 in a letter to the Commission. The Safety Evaluation 21 Report, which documents the results of the staff's 22 Safety Review.
23 And the final Environmental Impact 24 Statement which documents the results of the staff's 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 Environmental Review. Again, the yellow hexagons on 1
the slide indicate opportunities for public 2
participation.
3 An early opportunity is during the scoping 4
meeting today. A meeting on the draft Environmental 5
Impact Statement is another opportunity. The 6
opportunity to request a hearing ended on May 27th.
7 I understand that three Petitions to 8
Intervene were proffered, and among those three there 9
are about ten issues that are in contention. As I 10 mentioned, the ACRS meetings, also, are open to the 11 public.
12 That completes my overview of the License 13 Renewal Review and the Environmental Review in more 14 detail, and Richard Emch, the Project Manager is going 15 to discuss the Environmental Review in a little more 16 detail now.
17 MR. EMCH: Next slide, please. As this 18 slide indicates, we perform our environmental review 19 along the guidelines of the National Environmental 20 Policy Act of 1969.
21 What that Act requires is that Federal 22 agencies use a systematic approach to consider the 23 environmental impacts of major projects. The 24 environmental impact requirement or Environmental 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 Impact Statement is required any time one of those 1
major Federal actions is going to significantly affect 2
the quality of the human environment.
3 In this particular case for a license 4
renewal, the Commission made the decision that we 5
would issue an Environmental Impact Statement for all 6
License Renewal Applications, and that's what we're 7
about in this process. Next slide, please.
8 This is a, so to speak, a flowchart of the 9
analysis process that we follow. In the 1996 and 10 1999, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission developed 11 something we refer to as the GEIS, the Generic 12 Environmental Impact for License Renewal.
13 This statement evaluated the 92 aspects of 14 environmental impact for all 103 plants in the United 15 States. Of those, 69 of those impact issues were 16 considered to be Category 1 issues, which in our 17 parlance means they were the same, essentially, for 18 all plants and they were small.
19 The rest of the issues are what we call 20 Category 2 issues. The Category 1 issues we do not 21 have to do a plant-specific in-depth evaluation of 22 those issues for each plant.
23 The Category 2 issues we do have to do a 24 plant-specific review for each plant. For Category 1 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 issues, even though we don't do a plant-specific, in-1 depth review, we do what we call a search for new and 2
significant information.
3 That means we look to see if there's any 4
information that is new and significant, that would 5
cause us to want to reconsider that generic conclusion 6
on the Category 1 issues.
7 On the Category 2 issues, as I said, we do 8
a complete in-depth review. An example of a Category 9
1 issue is radiation protection. The effect on humans 10 of radiation from the plant, releases from the plant.
11 The reason that's a Category 1 issue, is 12 because the NRC has regulatory requirements and has 13 standards and limitations for doses to the public, and 14 the conclusion is, it's a generic conclusion. Because 15 as long as the plant continues to meet those 16 regulations, the impact is considered to be small.
17 An example of a Category 2 issue, is what 18 we call impingement. When the plant is drawing in 19 water from the Connecticut River for their cooling 20 systems, this water comes in through screens and there 21 is the chance that some aquatic organisms will be 22 trapped on those screens and die.
23 And that's an example of an Environmental 24 Impact that we do a plant-specific review for. For 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 the new and significant information, that's the one 1
that has the little yellow arrow on it.
2 If we find, if in the course of doing our 3
review, if we find that there is new and significant 4
information, that would cause us to question the 5
applicability of the Category 1,
the generic 6
conclusion, then, if we find that information then 7
that causes us to change our mind and to do an in-8 depth review of that issue for the plant.
9 Next slide, please. This is the decision 10 standard that we are reviewing against. Basically, my 11 version of it is, we are evaluating the plant to 12 determine if the environmental impact of an additional 13 20 years of operations is acceptable, is okay.
14 Next slide, please. When I say the 15 environmental impact of an additional 20 years, it's 16 important to remember here, I think, that the 17 evaluation that we are doing, is the impact from year 18 2012 to year 2032.
19 In order to do that, though, we have to 20 examine a lot of what is going on today in the 21 environmental impact from the plant. This slide has 22 a, is a schedule for the entire process.
23 I believe you folks all have this slide, 24 but I'm just going to hit a few of the high points.
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 Obviously, the scoping meeting today is part of our 1
scoping process. The scoping process, in the parlance 2
of NEPA, is we come into the community and we ask the 3
people who live and work near the plant, I sometimes 4
refer to you folks as our local environmental experts 5
because you live and work here.
6 We ask you if there's any information that 7
you think we need to know about. Any issues that you 8
think we need to review, in the environmental impact, 9
and any information that you think we need to be 10 available, that we need to be aware of.
11 That's our purpose, our stated purpose for 12 being here tonight. My purpose for being here tonight 13 is to hear what you folks have to say about that 14 issue.
15 There are other ways to give us those 16 comments. You can send them to us in writing. You 17 can send them by e-mail. And if you choose to do 18 that, instead of speaking tonight, we need to receive 19 those comments by June 23rd.
20 After we get those comments, we'll 21 evaluate them all, along with all the other 22 information that we have, and we'll develop a draft 23 Environmental Impact Statement.
24 We'll issue that. The current schedule 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 for that is December of this year. After we issue 1
that draft Environmental Impact Statement, we will 2
come back, probably to this same theater, in January, 3
and hold another public meeting where we will ask you, 4
the public, to give us your comments about that draft 5
Environmental Report.
6 You can tell us what you like, what you 7
don't like, what you think we missed, that sort of 8
thing. And, to help you with that, those of you who 9
are attending tonight, there were blue and yellow 10 cards.
11 If you filled out one of those cards, 12 hopefully you gave us your address, and when we 13 publish the draft Environmental Impact Statement, 14 we'll send a copy of it to you, so that you will know 15 that the process has started and you'll have good head 16 start on the process.
17 After we collect the public comments, 18 we'll then issue, we'll take those into consideration, 19 make adjustments as necessary in the draft, the draft 20 statement, and issue the final statement in August of 21 2007. Next slide, please.
22 This is a depiction of all the various 23 areas that we draw information from. First is, of 24 course, the Licensee's Application. There's a piece 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 of the Application called the Environmental Report.
1 There's copies of it outside, if you want 2
to take a look at it. If anybody wants to get a copy 3
of it, if you'll so note, on that little yellow or 4
blue card, we'll send you a copy of it.
5 We'll probably send you a cd, it's kind of 6
heavy, the whole report is. We also do, we have a 7
team of people from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 8
and our Contractor, Argonne National Laboratory.
9 The head of the team, the Lab Team, is 10 David Miller. David Miller is the Head of the Lab 11 Team from Argonne National Laboratory. They are a 12 team of experts in various areas, that help us do the 13 review for the environmental
- aspect, for the 14 environmental impact.
15 When we do an audit, we come out to the 16 site for a week-long look at the facility, at the 17 environs, we examine documentation. We meet with 18 people who we need to consult with, such as in the 19 state of Vermont, one is the Agency for Natural 20 Resources.
21 We met with the State Radiation Protection 22 people. We'll be meeting with others as time goes on.
23 We met with the State Historic Preservation Officer.
24 And we meet with local government officials, as well.
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 We meet with Social Services. One of the 1
issues that we look into is socio-economics. We 2
talked to permitting authorities in the state of 3
4 The state is responsible, has been 5
delegated the responsibility by EPA, to issue what we 6
call the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination 7
System Permit.
8 This is a permit that talks about what 9
level of heat and chemicals are allowed to be released 10 by the plant. And then finally, the thing that we're 11 here for tonight, is the public comments.
12 To get information from you folks to help 13 us with our review. Next slide, please. This is a 14 depiction of all the various areas, in a broad sense, 15 that we look at.
16 We look at environmental justice. We look 17 at socio-economics, air quality, water quality, 18 terrestrial and aquatic ecology, radiation protection, 19 hydrology, and archeology and culture resources. And 20 if I missed any, they're on the chart behind me.
21 Now I'd like to talk directly, give you 22 some additional information. First, as I said, my 23 name is Rich Emch. The phone number that you can 24 reach me at is on that slide up there.
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 We have made arrangements to have the 1
documents involved in the review, the Environmental 2
Report, any letters that we sent to the Licensee, any 3
requests for additional information, and, indeed, when 4
we issue the draft Environmental Statement, it will be 5
sent to these four libraries.
6 The Vernon Free Library in Vernon, the 7
Brooks Memorial Library here in Brattleboro. The 8
Hinsdale Public Library in Hinsdale, New Hampshire, 9
and the Dickinson Memorial Library in Northfield, 10 Massachusetts.
11 All four of these public libraries 12 graciously volunteered to make the documents available 13 so that members of the public can see them, just in 14 case you don't have access to a computer, to the 15 Internet.
16 If you do have access to the Internet, the 17 documents can also be viewed at the web site on the 18 slide up here. To send us written comments on, during 19 this scoping process, you can send them, by mail, to 20 the address that's up here.
21 You can send them by e-mail to the address 22 that's up there, VermontYankeeeis@NRC.gov. My staff 23 and I will be checking that web address everyday. Or, 24 you can deliver them in person to our offices in 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 Rockville, Maryland.
1 Again, as I mentioned before, we need to 2
receive the comments by June 23rd. If you don't quite 3
meet the June 23 rd, date - anything that we get by 4
June 23rd, we will consider.
5 Anything that we get after June 23rd, 6
we'll consider if there's time to do it. With that, 7
that completes my presentation. Actually, it 8
completes the NRC's presentation, and Chip, are you 9
ready for questions?
10 MR. CAMERON: Yes, I think we are. Are 11 there questions on, that will help you to understand 12 this process a little bit more clearly, before we go 13 into the comment part of the meeting. Yes, ma'am, if 14 you could just introduce yourself to us, please.
15 MS. NEITLICH: Yeah, my name is Jill 16 Neitlich. And I have a question about the democratic 17 process, and I did ask you before, Rich. And 18 basically what I think you said to me was that you 19 have a script and there's no room for the democratic 20 process.
21 But I'm kind of concerned about the 22 democratic process within the NRC. Because what I've 23 noted is that you haven't really turned down an 24 application for an uprate or for a license renewal.
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 So that's a little confusing to me.
1 So does that mean that actually there is 2
no democratic process within the NRC?
3 MR. CAMERON: Thank you, Jill, and Rich, 4
there's a number of issues there, and one is the 5
turning down of applications, and I'm not sure what 6
Jill is referring to by a democratic process within 7
the NRC.
8 But you might talk about what that process 9
is, for her.
10 MR. EMCH: Okay. Yes, Jill, and I did talk 11 before the meeting. Sort of a paraphrase of what I 12 said, Jill, but I'll try to be a little more complete 13 here.
14 MR.
CAMERON:
- Rich, excuse me for 15 interrupting you, but this is for everybody. When you 16 come down to this mic, I guess it's not projecting 17 back, so you really sort of need to speak into the 18 mic, so that everybody can hear you.
19 This one is, but you can't hear this one, 20 at all.
21 MR. EMCH: You can't hear me when I talk on 22 this mic? Oh, you have to be really close to it, 23 okay.
24 MR. CAMERON: Try to do it with that one, 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 and then if it doesn't work, then we'll figure this 1
out. Go ahead.
2 MR. EMCH: All right, I'm going to try to 3
hold it up real close, without actually inhaling it.
4 All right.
5 MR. CAMERON: Closer and louder.
6 MR. EMCH: Okay, I'll see what I can do.
7 What I was trying to say earlier was the democratic 8
process, if you will, occurs before we get to this, 9
here, okay.
10 The democratic process, if you will, is 11 when you go, when you as a community vote for the 12 members of your select
- board, your state 13 representative, your congressmen and state senators.
14 Your elected officials are the democratic 15 process. They're the ones who you rely on to make 16 decisions about what you, how things are going to work 17 in your state. The process that we're involved in is, 18 the Nuclear Regulatory Commissions's process is the 19 Licensee makes an application and the Nuclear 20 Regulatory Commission reviews it and makes decisions 21 based on its review of that application.
22 We do not, as part of that review process, 23 we, our review is against a set of technical review 24 standards, both either on the safety side or the 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 environmental side, and we don't, there is nothing in 1
our process that calls for a vote, by the people of 2
Brattleboro, about whether or not they want this plant 3
to be re-licensed.
4 As I said, the democratic process occurs 5
when you go to the polls, the voting booths, to vote 6
for your elected officials, and then they're the ones 7
who you rely on to make your decisions for your state 8
and your community.
9 MR. CAMERON: And, Rich, something that I 10 think, a point that Jill raised that's of interest to 11 everybody, is the status of our review of other 12 License Renewal Applications, and not just direct 13 answer to, well how many have we approved or denied, 14 but what that process is like in terms of a License 15 Application coming in?
16 Is there enough information in it to 17 request for additional information? If you could just 18 address that briefly, and then we'll go to other 19 people.
20 MR. EMCH: When an application is first 21 sent in, we do what we call an Acceptance Review.
22 Those of you who were here on March 1st, heard Johnny 23 describe the Acceptance Review.
24 Basically, that review is just to make 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 sure that there's enough of the appropriate kind of 1
information in the application to allow the NRC staff 2
to start its review.
3 Later on, as we go through the review, we 4
do our review against published technical standards, 5
both in the safety and environmental area. You've 6
heard Rani talk about the audits, the inspections.
7 And what we're doing in our review 8
process, is we're doing our review to make sure that 9
whatever the Licensee has put forward as their 10 application, meets our standards.
11 And if it meets our standards, the 12 Commission is probably going to accept the application 13 and probably going to approve the application, because 14 that's the way we do our work, we use standards.
15 Along the way, we're going to ask a lot of 16 questions. We refer to them as a request for 17 additional information. There will be hundreds of 18 them on Vermont Yankee, if it's anything like the 19 other plants.
20 There will be times along the way when we 21 will tell them that they, that what they have given us 22 does not meet our standards. And we will say you need 23 to consider, you either need to go back to the drawing 24 board in that particular area, but whatever you do, 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 you're going to have to do something, because you're 1
not meeting our standards in that area. And the 2
Licensee, the Applicant, will almost undoubtedly, as 3
all the 42 that have followed before them have done, 4
in all those areas the Licensee will go back and make 5
adjustments and eventually give us plans and 6
information that meets our standards and then the 7
application will be approved. That's the process that 8
we follow.
9 MR. CAMERON: Okay, other, thank you, Rich.
10 Are there other questions on process that we can 11 answer for you, before we go to comments? Evan, if 12 you could just introduce yourself.
13 MR.
MULHOLLAND:
My name is Evan 14 Mulholland. You had a slide, information gathering.
15 And my question is does the NRC, on the environmental 16 front, does the NRC passively take information that's 17 submitted, or there are staff members that go out and 18 do extra studies and assessments and that sort?
19 MR. EMCH: We consult with a wide range of 20 people, Fish and Wildlife Service, NOAA Marine Fishery 21 Service, the Agency for Natural Resources in the state 22 of Vermont, with the state organizations in New 23 Hampshire and Massachusetts.
24 We consult with a wide range of experts 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 and people who are in the know. We don't go out and 1
actually count fish, no. But we talk to the people 2
who do.
3 MR. CAMERON: Okay, and part of the purpose 4
of the scoping and comment process on the draft 5
Environmental Impact Statement, is to the extent that 6
we have not found information on our own, we look for 7
people to submit information that may be relevant to 8
our review, right?
9 MR. EMCH: Correct.
10 MR. CAMERON: Okay. Anybody else have a 11 question on the License Renewal Process? Okay, let's 12 go over there and find out what the questions is. And 13 if you could just introduce yourself to us now.
14 MS. NELKIN: Hi, I'm Nancy Nelkin. Well, 15 referring to the democratic process question before, 16 one of the issues is, you know, you are saying well we 17 elected our representatives.
18 This plant is in Vermont, just miles from 19 the Massachusetts border. Those of us in 20 Massachusetts and in New Hampshire, don't have a 21 democratic process.
22 Furthermore, the Nuclear Regulatory 23 Commission, you know, you guys have this whole 24 bureaucracy and lawyers, and it's really not fair, 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 it's not a fair fight.
1 MR. EMCH: I'm not sure what your question 2
is, ma'am?
3 MS. NELKIN: Actually, I have a number of 4
questions, so bear with me. It was said early in the 5
presentation that the 40-year license was not based on 6
a safety concern, it was based on an economic concern.
7 How do we know when a plant is no longer 8
safe to operate? That's a question I have. One of 9
the speakers went over and said, oh, we're going to do 10 assessments and inspections, and inspections and 11 almost counted how many times she said the word 12 inspections, but it's never been an independent safety 13 assessment that we have asked for.
14 And, essentially, has been rammed down our 15 throats. So, you know, my feeling is that the idea of 16 assessments, you know, as long as you're going over 17 paperwork and talking to people who, you know, aren't 18 taking a fresh look at it, we don't feel safe.
19 MS. FRANOVICH: Let me address --
20 MS. NELKIN: And I have another question.
21 And that is --
22 MS. FRANOVICH: Before you ask, before you 23 ask --
24 MS. NELKIN: -- this is the third 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 question.
1 MS. FRANOVICH: -- but let me answer that 2
one, so I don't lose track of it, before you get to 3
your third one, and then, Rich, can we come back and 4
get our third one, after I answer the --
5 MR. CAMERON: Yeah, and I just want to say 6
is that we welcome your comments and hope that you 7
make some of your conclusions, give those to us when 8
we go to the speaking part.
9 But if you could just give us the 10 questions and we'll try to answer them. And, Rani, 11 you want to go to the second question?
12 MS. FRANOVICH: If it's okay, I'd like to 13 go on and answer the 40-year license term, and then 14 the reliance on inspections. And then we'll get to 15 your third one.
16 The 40-year license term is based on 17 economic considerations and anti-trust factors. When 18 it comes to plant aging, and when a plant becomes too 19 old to safely operate, it's really not so much about 20 the plant, it's about the systems, the structures and 21 the components that are relied on to make sure the 22 plant can operate safely.
23 And so we don't look at it on a plant 24 basis, we look at each individual structure, component 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 and system, that's important to safety. And we make 1
sure that either it's replaced, it's refurbished, or 2
they test it or they monitor it, or they do something 3
to manage the aging of that structure, component or 4
system. So that's how --
5 MS. NELKIN: So you're suggesting that a 6
plant will never be obsolete as long as you can 7
replace the parts?
8 MS. FRANOVICH: I'm suggesting that for 9
license renewal, what we look at is the management of 10 aging of structures, components and systems, rather 11 than when does the magic day happen when the plant is 12 no longer safe.
13 As to the inspections, yeah, we do conduct 14 inspections. We send people to the plant to look at 15 the material condition. To look at aging management 16 in place, aging management programs the Applicant is 17 relying on today, to manage the effects of aging.
18 And so it's not just a paper review. We 19 actually do --
20 MS. NELKIN: But the people from the NRC, 21 who already have a track record --
22 MS. FRANOVICH: Right.
23 MS. NELKIN: -- don't we know, to let 24 things go --
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 MS. FRANOVICH: And so, the NRC --
1 MS.
NELKIN: -- in lieu of the 2
regulations.
3 MS. FRANOVICH: Could I please answer your 4
question. The NRC's position is that it's an 5
independent Federal agency that has the role and 6
responsibility of regulating nuclear material use in 7
this country, including operators of nuclear power 8
plants.
9 There's also the Advisory Committee on 10 Reactor Safeguards, that then independently reviews 11 the work of the staff and reports its recommendations 12 and conclusions directly to the Commission.
13 MS. NELKIN: Okay, one more question, and 14 that is why are we looking at this license renewal in 15 2006. You know, I would like to see the track record 16 of Vermont Yankee between now and at least 2010, 17 before we make this decision.
18 MS. FRANOVICH: The regulations require 19 that an Applicant have about 20 years of operating 20 experience before they can come in for renewal. But 21 in order to ensure that there is a timely review of 22 their application, because this is, it's a significant 23 capital investment for an Applicant to apply for 24 license renewal.
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 They want to know the outcome of the 1
Regulators decision process in a timely manner. So, 2
we require that they submit their applications within 3
five years of the end of their 40-year license term.
4 So anywhere between 20, year 20 and year 5
35, an Applicant can come in for renewal. And when 6
they decide to do that, it is really kind of an 7
economic decision of there's of their choosing.
8 MR. CAMERON: Okay, thank you. Thank you 9
for those questions and, thanks, Rani and Rich. Yes, 10 sir.
11 MR. BLOCK: I have two questions that are 12 connected. My name is John Block, that's B-l-o-c-k.
13 The first question is how often does the input that 14 you receive from the public, actually effect the scope 15 of a GEIS?
16 And the second is, please cite for me 17 which specific cases I could look up and find, in a 18 GEIS, or a draft GEIS, evidence of the effect of the 19 public comments upon that process. Thank you.
20 MR. CAMERON: Okay, thank you, Jonathan.
21 Richard.
22 MR. EMCH: I don't know that I can tell you 23 how many, you know, on every single one, but I'll give 24 you an example, sir. I was the Project Manager for 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 the Millstone Plant review in Waterford, Connecticut 1
that ended last year. And during scoping a number of 2
local citizens provided us, during the scoping 3
meeting, they provided us copies of studies about 4
radiation heath effects.
5 Most of them we already knew about, but 6
there were a couple of them that were fairly local, 7
that we were not aware of. And so they provided those 8
to us.
9 And in Section 4.7 of the Final 10 Environmental Impact Statement that we wrote, we 11 discussed the status review of those studies.
12 MR. CAMERON: Okay, thank you, John. We're 13 going to take two final questions here and then we're 14 going to go to public comment. Yes.
15 MEGAN: My name is Megan, and I was 16 wondering if the Hinsdale Evacuation Point is in 17 Keene, and is it part of the evaluation assessment?
18 MR. CAMERON: Okay, Rich, could you, 19 there's a, did you hear the question?
20 MR. EMCH: I did, Chip.
21 MR. CAMERON: Okay.
22 MR. EMCH: As Rani mentioned in her 23 presentation, license renewal does not really address 24 emergency preparedness. As Rani also mentioned, the 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 reasons why it doesn't and is, that it's just not 1
considered to be something that we would, it's a today 2
issue.
3 If there was a problem, it's a today 4
issue. If there is a problem with an Emergency 5
Preparedness Plan, it's not something that we want to 6
be waiting until 2010 or 2012, to be assessing.
7 If there's an issue with emergency 8
preparedness, it's something that needs to be 9
addressed now, for the current operating plant. And 10 there are processes in place to do that.
11 The Nuclear Regulatory has processes.
12 FEMA has processes. The state of Vermont, the state 13 of New Hampshire have processes to do that. They have 14 regular drills and exercises where they identify 15 places in the plan that need to be improved, and that 16 is indeed what is happening here.
17 I understand there were some questions 18 about school buses, during the last exercise in New 19 Hampshire, and the state of New Hampshire is taking 20 actions to address those.
21 MR. CAMERON: Okay, and that answers the 22 question about the relationship of emergency planning 23 to license renewal.
24 But just as an emergency planning issue 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 for Megan's benefit, Hinsdale is part of the emergency 1
planning review? I guess I'm asking a question?
2 MR. EMCH: Hinsdale is inside the ten mile 3
EPZ, yes sir.
4 MR. CAMERON: Okay, all right, thank you.
5 And let's go to Gary. If you could just introduce 6
yourself to us.
7 MR. SACHS: Gary Sachs, Brattleboro. I 8
heard you say that you look to these environmental 9
impact meetings to determine the scope of your impact, 10 to learn things from us.
11 And this is a partial comment and a 12 partial question. For the most part, we, in the local 13 environment are volunteers. And very few of us have 14 enough time, very, very few of us have the dedication 15 to this issue that we certainly would expect from you, 16 as the NRC, and from individuals who work with 17 Entergy.
18 And, so I think it's an awful lot to ask 19 the locals to come to you with how we should approach 20 the environmental scope and how it affects the 21 environment.
22 My other question is more direct. How 23 many NRC paid employees are here today, given the 24 number of us, residents, who are not paid here? Thank 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 you.
1 MR. CAMERON: Okay, thank you, Gary. And, 2
Rich, in regard to Gary's first point, you did 3
mentioned that you talked to state and local 4
government agencies about issues, right?
5 MR. EMCH: Let me give a slightly broader 6
answer than that, Chip.
7 MR. CAMERON: Okay, all right.
8 MR. EMCH: As I mentioned earlier, we have 9
the Generic Environmental Impact Statement, and what 10 we did was we found approximately, we searched and 11 found approximately, decided approximately 92 issues 12 that are always part of the scope of the review.
13 And we do a search, an exhaustive search 14 for additional information. And when I said that 15 we're here to ask you for your help, we can do the 16 review without your help, if that's what you're 17 driving at, sir.
18 But we think it's important for us to come 19 out and ask you for your help, just in case there is 20 some information that you have that we don't. And 21 that's why we're here.
22 MR. CAMERON: And I guess there was a 23 question. Gary asked about the number of NRC 24 employees, and I would say that all of the NRC 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 employees who are here tonight, or today, are paid as 1
employees of the government. And I don't know 2
approximately how many people we have here, but Rich?
3 MR. EMCH: Approximately 25.
4 MR. CAMERON: Okay. We're going to go to 5
public comment now, and thank you for those questions, 6
and thank you Rich. We're going to go to Mr. Ray 7
Shadis, first, to lead off for us.
8 And Ray is with the New England Coalition 9
and he'll tell you more about that. And I don't think 10 we, Deb Katz is not here right now. So, I'll let you 11 know who is going to speak next.
12 MR. SHADIS: The New England Coalition 13 intends to file written comments. We have a number of 14 comments. I pulled out four to address in the two 15 meetings this afternoon and this evening.
16 And by agreement with the NRC folks, just 17 as to not take up too much time, I'm going to deal 18 with two of them this afternoon and then the other two 19 this evening.
20 Basically, the four issues are the off-21 site spent fuel pool accident consequences, 22 radiological consequences. The cumulative off-site 23 radiological impact of routine operations, as well as 24 the radiological impact of routine operations on 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 eventual decommissioning.
1 And the cumulative off-site impact of 2
chemical releases unplanned. And, finally, 3
consideration of the advances in the discipline of 4
seismological evaluation.
5 And I would just start with the spent fuel 6
pool accident off-site consequences. I don't know if 7
a spent fuel pool accident or act of sabotage, is 8
within the design basis accident that are considered 9
in the environmental assessment or not.
10 The credibility of such accidents was 11 roundly studied by NRC staff in NUREG 1738, on the 12 accident risk and decommissioning nuclear power 13 stations. And that study, in turn, referenced a 14 number of other NRC studies, many of them having to do 15 with operating plants.
16 Two of those studies specifically 17 considered Vermont Yankee on a site-specific basis.
18 One of those studies dealt with the seismic fragility 19 of two spent fuel pools. One in a PWR, and then one 20 in a boiler water reactor that happens to be Vermont 21 Yankee.
22 NRC's consultant, seismic consultant, Dr.
23 Robert P. Kennedy, in an appendix to NUREG 1738, says 24 that the postulated critical failure mode for the 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 Vermont Yankee spent fuel pool, would be a plane sheer 1
failure of the floor slat. Then it goes on to say, 2
possibly, the entire floor will drop out.
3 But I think such a gross failure is 4
unlikely. And then he goes on to say, that in his 5
opinion, a more likely failure would be a wall 6
failure, in that case leaving as much as four feet of 7
water in the bottom of the pool.
8 And, of course, you gentlemen know that if 9
there is some water left in the pool, it is a far more 10 dangerous situation, then if the pool was drained 11 completely.
12 Because that water will then block cooling 13 up through the fuel assemblies. And I need to point 14 out that, from our perspective, that the issue that 15 probably needs to be addressed, in your environmental 16 impact study, or in a supplement to it, would be the 17 consequences.
18 And the appendix, let's see, where is it 19 now. Just one moment. Yeah, Table A4-7, this is in 20 Appendix 4. Using the base case of Millstone 1, which 21 is a reactor almost identical to Vermont Yankee, with 22 just three and a half cores in the spent fuel pool.
23 Vermont Yankee has probably twice that or 24 close to twice that. It speculates that with 95 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 percent evacuation, the Table includes an estimate of 1
26,800 cancer fatalities within a distance of zero to 2
500 miles.
3 Whether that's strictly speculative, 4
postulated or whatever, they're at six, in the Table, 5
in a referenced NRC study, NUREG CR-5176. And those 6
numbers have not be repudiated, they have not been put 7
out there in speculative space.
8 I think, when the original license was 9
issued, for Vermont Yankee and estimates were made, 10 public representations were made as to the potential 11 for consequences of a design-basis accident, we had 12 certain numbers given to us.
13 And, since that time, of course there's 14 been a lot of representation from the industry and 15 also from NRC, in essence, diminishing those numbers, 16 putting all of those numbers away.
17 I guess it's New England Coalition's 18 position that NRC really needs to reconcile the 19 numbers from the original license time, license 20 period, and the representations that are being made by 21 NRC spokespersons today.
22 By the Utility spokespersons and the 23 numbers in this report, which I think are quite 24 outstanding. So, that is, that is one comment.
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 And the, on the second topic, cumulative 1
off-site radiological impact of routine operations and 2
also the cumulative impact of routine operations and 3
radiologically on decommissioning.
4 There are two things that we would like 5
you to consider. One is that, as you know, the state 6
of Vermont posts radiation measuring devices, TLDs, 7
around the plant perimeter.
8 And the state reports that three times in 9
the last decade or so, that the state limit of 20 10 millirem per year has been exceeded at the fence line.
11 And we took a quick look at those reports 12 for those three years, and then also at a study, I 13 believe, done by Duke Engineering for Vermont Yankee, 14 and found that the TLDs in the same sector were the 15 ones that read high in each of those instances.
16 And, you know, this is not an anomaly for 17 a bad detection instrument, because they are changed 18 out quarterly, and the excess is the average over a 19 year.
20 The other thing that we noticed is that 21 the only other abnormally high reading, that occurred 22 in each of those three instances, was at the interior 23 of the Vernon Elementary School. The other thing that 24 we noticed was that the turbine hall and the offending 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 TLD, and the elementary school, line up axially.
1 There's a straight line to be drawn from the turbine 2
hall, to the one monitor that read high, to the 3
elementary school reading high.
4 The state folks thought this might be an 5
artifact of excess of radon in the school. But, of 6
course, we don't generally use TLDs to go chasing 7
radon. The other thing that we noticed, was that 8
there was no correlation between the measured amount 9
of radon in the school, for those instances, and the 10 high TLD readings.
11 From an amateur science point of view, we 12 believe there's enough here to warrant real 13 investigation.
14 (Applause.)
15 MR. SHADIS: I should point out to you that 16 we have not looked for correlation on weather or 17 meteorological conditions, but it might well be a 18 consideration that these high readings are a result of 19 temperature inversion and downdraft from the release 20 stack.
21 In any case, just for the sake of these 22 little nuclear workers over there in the elementary 23 school, we really do think this shall be part of the 24 environmental scoping.
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 The other thing, very quickly, in terms of 1
cumulative radiological impact, I discussed this 2
briefly with Dr. Masnik, here from NRC, earlier.
3 Vermont Yankee had gotten permission to 4
store contaminated soil on site, starting back, I 5
think in 1998, maybe a little earlier. And, at the 6
time, the amount was some excavated soil from a 7
construction project, about 135 cubic yards.
8 And then roughly at 35 or 40 cubic yards 9
per
- year, they anticipated generating through 10 contaminated sanding salts from the roads from silt in 11 the cooling towers, and also from waste sludge.
12 And, in 2004, Entergy received permission 13 to increase that amount. They had accumulated, they 14 thought, about 500 cubic meters of contaminated soil 15 on site, and they wished to dispose of, on-site, an 16 additional 150 cubic meters per year.
17 That's about ten big dump truck loads.
18 And this disposal site or, excuse me, this storage 19 site is on the south end of the site, just south of 20 the cooling towers.
21 It is constantly sprayed down with what is 22 called drift, sideways spray from the cooling towers.
23 It is on the riverbank. We believe that the 24 phenomenon of bio uptake, of sedimentary separation, 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 of chemical combination, can leach and separate and 1
concentrate the radioactive material in that disposed 2
of or stored soil, complicating decommissioning, 3
polluting the river, winding up in the biota.
4 And so we believe that should also be 5
investigated as part of the environmental assessment.
6 Those are the two topics. Thank you for listening 7
that long.
8 MR. CAMERON: Well, great, and thank you 9
for those specific comments, Ray.
10 MR. SHADIS: And we'll provide documents.
11 As I said, we will be doing written comments.
12 MR. CAMERON: Okay. Thank you, Ray. Let's 13 go to Evan, Evan Mulholland. And then we'll go to 14 Chris Williams and then Shawn Banfield. Evan 15 Mulholland.
16 MR. MULHOLLAND: I have written comments, 17 I'm just going to read them. My name is Evan 18 Mulholland. I'm an attorney representing the New 19 England Coalition in its appeal in Vermont 20 Environmental Court of the Clean Water Act Permanent 21 Amendment recently issued for the Vermont Yankee Power 22 Plant, as full disclosure.
23 I'm here today, though, as a member of the 24 public and I'm concerned about the impact on our 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 environment of 20 more years of operation of the 1
Vermont Yankee reactor.
2 Specifically, I've got concerns about the 3
effect on the Connecticut River and on the fish and 4
other wildlife that live in and on the river.
5 According to the environmental report drafted for this 6
license renewal process, Entergy states that it 7
withdraws water to cool the reactor, from the river, 8
at a rate of up to 360,000 gallons per minute when 9
using once through cooling.
10 The majority of this water is discharged 11 back into the river at temperatures that can reach 100 12 degrees Fahrenheit, at the point of discharge. The 13 recently issued NPDES Permit Amendment, which New 14 England Coalition is appealing, allows for Vermont 15 Yankee to increase the temperature of the river by an 16 additional one degree Fahrenheit over what it was 17 previously allowed.
18 The environmental impact of this extra 19 thermal waste discharged into the
- river, is 20 potentially significant. Temperature is critical for 21 American Shad and other fish species, particularly 22 during migration and spawning.
23 Even this one degree increase in water 24 temperature may adversely effect the Shad and other 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 species, reducing their population in the river 1
system. In its report, however, Entergy does not 2
assess these impacts.
3 Entergy's conclusion that the impact on 4
the environment is small, is based on the fact that 5
the discharge complies with state and Federal 6
pollution limits.
7 There's no further discussion of what 8
effect another 20 years of increased thermal discharge 9
will have on the eco-system. Whether or not the 10 discharge from Vermont Yankee is in compliance with 11 its State and Federal permits, Entergy should be 12 required to take a hard look at, and assess a direct, 13 indirect and cumulative impacts on the river eco-14 system of 20 more years of increased thermal 15 discharge. Thanks.
16 MR. CAMERON: Thank you very much, Evan.
17 Is Chris Williams here? Chris.
18 MR. WILLIAMS: My name is Chris Williams.
19 I live in Hancock in Addison County. And I'm not 20 certain that my unprepared remarks here are going to 21 be completely on point, but I believe that the safe 22 operation and safe oversight of any operating nuclear 23 power plant in this country, or in the world, has a 24 significant long-term impact on the environment in the 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 area where the plant is located. And, just for the 1
record, standing here in Brattleboro, I want to point 2
out some experiences I've had in two locations in the 3
United States.
4 The first is in the state of Ohio. I 5
lived in the Midwest for quite a while, doing battle 6
with the nuclear industry, as well as the coal-fired 7
electric industry.
8 In Port Clinton, Ohio, the Davis Besse 9
Nuclear Power Plant is operated by First Energy 10 Corporation. Several years ago, with significant 11 Nuclear Regulatory Commission on-site oversight, it 12 was discovered that a boric acid leak had eaten a hole 13 in the reactor vessel lid, which is about 18 inches 14 thick.
15 That hole came within several millimeters, 16 several millimeters of breaching. The whole thing 17 happened, as I said, under the oversight of the 18 Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
19 Outside that plant, there's a big sign.
20 It has safety is Job One. What happened at Davis 21 Besse was criminal. That the Nuclear Regulatory 22 Commission allowed them to go get another vessel head 23 from Midland Plant, which was canceled, up in 24 Michigan, and put that plant back in operation, was 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 nothing short of criminal. The second reactor that I 1
had quite of a bit of experience with in the Midwest 2
was in Bridgeman, Michigan.
3 It was the DC Cook Nuclear Power Plant, 4
owned by then, American Electric Power. The Bridgeman 5
Plant was shut down after it was discovered that 6
significant safety features in the plant were not 7
operating, in some cases, for more, not operating 8
properly, for some cases, for more than ten years.
9 Outside that plant there's another sign 10 that said safety is Job One. Those safety systems 11 were non-operational with significant daily oversight, 12 on-site, by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
13 Here at Vernon, as in the rest of the 14 country, it's part of the operating license that the 15 Nuclear Regulatory Commission gives the companies that 16 operate these power plants, as part of that process 17 and part of that license, they're allowed to routinely 18 emit radioactive releases, in both the air and water.
19 I'm sure everybody in this room knows 20 that. Long-term, that's a problem. We'd like to know 21 how much has been released by the operation of Vermont 22 Yankee, year-to-date, or operational lifetime to date.
23 And how much is projected under routine 24 operational conditions? How much is going to be 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 released over the proposed license extension?
1 I want to close with just one other 2
observation. Recently, several people, four from 3
Vermont, traveled to Kiev to attend a conference, 4
marking the 20 th Anniversary of the accident at 5
6 There were probably 150 of us that took 7
the conference organizers up on the opportunity to go 8
visit the Chernobyl site. And I have to say, we've 9
all seen the pictures. And the pictures actually, 10 they do the situation justice.
11 What struck me the most was that the 12 people living 30, 40 kilometers away, from the 13 accident site, very basic, poor, agrarian folks. They 14 were people that depend on their land for everything.
15 And what's just painfully obvious, when 16 you visit there? Is that their lives have been 17 destroyed by the technology that was arrogantly placed 18 and operated 30 to 40 kilometers away.
19 And the folks that lived in Pripyat, the 20 community that built and operated Chernobyl, well, you 21 know, they're not there anymore. Pripyat is a ghost 22 town.
23 But the one thing that the locals, the 24 non-nuclear locals had, was their land. And it was 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 taken away from them. So as we look to re-license 1
Vermont Yankee, we have to draw a parallel.
2 We're not so different from the, from the 3
people in the Ukraine or in Belarus. And when these 4
companies tell us that safety is their Number One job 5
and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission assures us that 6
they're on the job all the time.
7 I don't believe we can take those claims 8
seriously, and have to do everything we can to ensure 9
that arrogance doesn't prevail. Just because you're 10 scientifically smart, doesn't mean you have your act 11 together. And I'll just leave it at that, thanks.
12 (Applause.)
13 MR. CAMERON: Thank you, Mr. Williams.
14 Shawn Banfield.
15 MS. BANFIELD: Good afternoon. My name is 16 Shawn Banfield and I'm here today as an active member 17 and an Officer of the Board of Director for the 18 Vermont Energy Partnership.
19 I'd first like to thank the NRC for 20 hosting this meeting today. I do have a prepared 21 statement, which I will read from. And I'll start 22 with the Vermont Energy Partnership was founded in 23 2005, shortly after the state report warned the series 24 of energy challenges they will face in Vermont.
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 Our founding members came together because 1
they recognized the importance of making sure we have 2
adequate electricity, so Vermont continues to be a 3
great place to live and work.
4 The Partnership is a diverse group of more 5
than 50 business, labor, community leaders, committed 6
to addressing the immense electricity supply issues 7
that we are going to face in Vermont, in the very near 8
future.
9 Our members include a cross-section of 10 experts of the energy sector. Our members employ 11 thousands of Vermonters. They run big and small 12 businesses.
13 They represent Union workers, some of whom 14 devote their professional lives to upgrading the 15 Vermont Yankee Plant safely. The Partnership fully 16 supports the re-licensing of the Vermont Yankee 17 Nuclear Power Plant in Vernon, and I will explain to 18 you why.
19 It is no secret that Vermont's demand for 20 energy is continuing to grow. It may be a less known 21 fact, however, that Vermont faces uncertainty over its 22 future energy supply.
23 Currently, one-third of Vermont's electric 24 supply comes from Hydro Quebec. These long-term 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 contracts with the state will begin to expire in 2014, 1
and there is no guarantee that these contracts will 2
either be renewed or renegotiated given the company's, 3
Hydro Quebec's more local business opportunities in 4
the province.
5 Another approximate one-third of our 6
supply here in Vermont, is made up of a wide array of 7
both in-state and out-of-state sources, renewable and 8
non-renewable.
9 The Partnership supports the in-state 10 development of renewable sources, and we encourage the 11 increased used of energy efficiency in the expansion 12 on conservation measures.
13 However, the fact remains a reliable 14 energy portfolio, here in Vermont, must be made up 15 elsewhere, of base load sources of power. Vermont 16 Yankee accounts for the last one-third of our Vermont 17 portfolio.
18 About 34 percent of Vermont's total 19 electricity supply needs are met by the Vermont Yankee 20 Plant. So let me put this debate into proper context.
21 Vermont has not brought on a single, significant power 22 generating facility in over 20 years.
23 And there are no plans to do so in the 24 near term. To make matters worse, proposals to 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 develop small scale generation in Vermont, have been 1
met with sharp criticism and serious opposition. In 2
a time when energy costs are at their highest, Vermont 3
Yankee will not only play an essential role in our 4
state's energy portfolio, it is critically important 5
to the Vermont economy and environment.
6 From an economic standpoint, I would just 7
quickly say that a stable, relatively low-cost power 8
provider will help to maintain and expand businesses 9
here in Vermont, while at the same time providing for 10 an opportunity to bring and attract new businesses to 11 the state.
12 In a
time where Vermont faces an 13 increasing, aging population, the plant provides 14 employment to 600 highly skilled men and women. These 15 individuals and the company provide more than 200 16 million in economic benefits to the Windham County 17 Region and the state as a whole.
18 According to the Vermont Public Board, I'm 19 sorry, the Public Service Department, the company, 20 through the State's Power Purchase Agreement, will 21 provide customers in Vermont, approximately 250 22 million dollars in savings over the life of the 23 contract.
24 But aside from the important economic 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 benefits, the Vermont Yankee's continued operation, 1
I'm sorry, there are also some relative environmental 2
benefits from this in-state power generation source.
3 In 2005, alone, according to the Nuclear 4
Energy Institute, Vermont Yankee avoided emissions of 5
7,700 tons of sulphur dioxide, 2,000 tons of nitrogen 6
oxides, and 2.5 million tons of carbon dioxide.
7 Emissions of sulphur dioxide, lead to the 8
formation of acid rain. Nitrogen oxide is the 9
precursor to both ground-level ozone and smog. And 10 greenhouse gases, like carbon dioxide, contribute to 11 global warming.
12 We live in a country where half the 13 electricity generated comes from coal-burning sources.
14 Yet, in Vermont, we can be very proud to say that 15 that's not the case.
16 Vermont Yankee does not release harmful 17 greenhouse gases or other toxins into the atmosphere 18 which are the primary cause for global warming. The 19 issue of global warming, a climate change, has rapidly 20 reached alarming levels.
21 And power-generated facilities have been 22 at the heart of that crisis. In the United States, 23 coal is the leading power provider with over 600 24 plants operating.
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 Of these plants, of the 600 plants, 36 1
percent of all U.S. emissions are accounted by those 2
plants' generation. It has become abundantly clear 3
that the nuclear energy is the only emission-free 4
source that can meet consumer demand, reliably and at 5
a reasonable cost.
6 Leading environmentalists, from around the 7
world, like Dr. Patrick Moore, Co-Founder of Green 8
Peace, have come to the conclusion that nuclear power 9
is the only source that can help remedy and save the 10 planet from catastrophic climate change.
11 Just last month, Dr. Moore said in the 12 Washington Post, nuclear energy is the only large 13 scale, cost effective energy source that can reduce 14 these emissions, while continuing to satisfy the 15 growing demand for power.
16 And these days, in these days it can do so 17 safely. He went on to say that it's extremists who 18 fail to consider the enormous and obvious benefits of 19 nuclear power, also fail to understand that nuclear 20 energy is practical, safe and environmentally 21 friendly.
22 Without Vermont Yankee, Vermont utilities 23 would be forced to buy additional power on the spot 24 market that would be less reliable and certainly 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 considerably more expensive.
1 So the Partnership asks, do Vermonters 2
really want to pay more and to depend on power from 3
fossil fuel sources, such as natural gas and coal, 4
which contribute to the global warming and the earth's 5
degradation?
6 The Vermont Partnership thinks not. In 7
closing, the Vermont Yankee has an important and 8
crucial role to play in the future of your state.
9 It is both environmentally and 10 economically appropriate to grant the plant a license 11 extension. We know that there is a wide array of 12 support for the continued operation of this plant, for 13 the reasons I have articulated here today.
14 Its essential economic benefits. Its 15 environmentally sound operations, and its important 16 role as a component of the Vermont energy portfolio.
17 On behalf of the Partnership, we would 18 like to thank you for taking the time to hear from us 19 today.
20 MR. CAMERON: Thank you, Shawn. Is Dan 21 MacArthur here? Dan.
22 MR. MACARTHUR: Hi, my name is Dan 23 MacArthur, I'm the Emergency Management Director for 24 the town of Marlboro. I want to make several points 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 here.
1 First of all, Marlboro has actually, is 2
one of those formal petitions for hearing that the NRC 3
should have received, and we are requesting that 4
Marlboro be included in the EPZ.
5 It's the only town with any property 6
within the ten mile radius, which was not included 7
when the original license was granted in the 1960s, I 8
guess. And we are formally requesting that if there 9
is going to be an extension of the license, that the 10 license be changed so that Marlboro can be included.
11 It's only fair, and there's no, as far as 12 we're concerned, there's no other possible way to 13 reconfigure the EPZ. I've drawn a little map of it 14 and I will, if the current license that the NRC has 15 granted to Vermont Yankee shows a really funny shaped 16 EPZ with Marlboro just completely hacked out of it.
17 So we would like to be included in that, 18 and that will be part of an ongoing formal request 19 that we have. As for the purpose of the meeting here 20 today, the environmental scoping, I'd like to follow 21 up a little bit on comments that Ray Shadis made and 22 Chris Williams, as well.
23 We, there's many of us in the local 24 citizenry know that our environment, our homes, our 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 farms, our entire livelihood are at risk here. If 1
there's ever a sizeable release of radioactivity, then 2
our property values will plummet. Our ability to 3
sell, possibly even eat our own produce, will be 4
diminished.
5 And I
can't imagine a
greater 6
environmental impact than that. I mean we're talking 7
about all or nothing, here. And I don't know whether 8
you want to try to do a mathematical analysis of all 9
or nothing, or not.
10 But from my perspective, it doesn't make 11 any sense. If there's any possibility, that there's 12 going to be any kind of impact like that, then I think 13 that the NRC can only include that in the 14 environmental scoping.
15 And this goes on. I understand that the 16 NRC is only looking at environmental impact until the 17 year 2032, but that doesn't do much good for those of 18 us who live in this area, and I think more and more 19 are coming to grips with the fact that the waste 20 that's being generated is going to be stored here, in 21 our backyard.
22 And it's going to be incredibly dangerous 23 for thousands of years. So, unless the NRC can 24 promise us that we aren't going to be the ones who 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 monitor that material, then we're going to have to 1
insist that the effect of that material be included in 2
any environmental scoping review.
3 (Applause.)
4 MR. MACARTHUR: As I said earlier, I can't 5
imagine any greater environmental impact, and I can't 6
imagine the NRC extending the license if there's any 7
possibility of this happening.
8 I was interested, the person before me was 9
going through the benefits of nuclear energy, but, as 10 we all know, there are many, many hidden costs 11 included in producing energy from nuclear power.
12 One of them being that there is a sizeable 13 payroll at the Federal level, paid for by our taxes, 14 which is specifically for the purpose of seeing that 15 nuclear energy continues to operate fairly cheaply.
16 So just think of that. The people who are 17 here today getting paid by us, the citizenry, we're 18 paying for that in our taxes, but it's really a cost 19 that should be associated with the electric costs of 20 nuclear power.
21 Now somebody asked earlier, how many 22 people are here from the NRC. And it occurred to me 23 and I think this is the reason that you're all here 24 today, is to try to establish some sort of comfort 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 level with those of us who live here, with the fact 1
that there is in fact a good and a quality oversight 2
of this process.
3 I, my question is this. There are 4
approximately 25 people here who work for the NRC now.
5 Of those 25 people, and I was at all of the previous 6
meetings and I heard distinguished scientists stand up 7
and say well I worked in the nuclear industry, and now 8
I work for the NRC.
9 Of the people here today, who work for the 10 NRC, how many people have been in the nuclear industry 11 and are currently working for NRC? I wonder if we 12 could have a show of hands on that?
13 MR. CAMERON: Dan, I'm sure that some of 14 our people have worked for the nuclear industry, 15 others have not. But we're not going to conduct a 16 poll right now, okay?
17 So if you could finish up with your 18 comments, we'd appreciate it.
19 MR. MACARTHUR: I don't think I need to say 20 anymore. That seems to have said it very well, 21 thanks.
22 (Applause.)
23 MR. CAMERON: I don't think it did say it 24 fairly well, but I did have a question for you, to 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 make sure that your request, formal request that 1
Marlboro be considered in the Emergency Planning Zone.
2 I want to make sure that doesn't get lost, and you 3
said you had filed a Petition to Intervene and that 4
there would be perhaps something other coming in as a 5
formal request.
6 Should we, should we consider your 7
comments today the formal request, or is there another 8
written request that's going to follow? I guess 9
that's my question for you, just so that I know what, 10 we know what to respond to.
11 MR. MACARTHUR: Yeah, thanks. I will ask 12 that you include my today's comments as a follow up to 13 that request. I also understood that having 14 petitioned by the 27th of May, or whatever it was, 15 that we wouldn't need to follow up.
16 Just today's comments are just to 17 reinforce our official request, which I believe has 18 already gone in. So if there's more needed, let me 19 know.
20 MR. CAMERON: Okay, and the reason that I 21 wanted to distinguish this, is that your request to 22 participate in the Hearing and the request to be part 23 of the Emergency Planning Zone, can also be treated 24 separately, so that if your Petition to Intervene, is 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 not granted, that your request is still before the 1
agency to be part of the Emergency Planning. John, 2
and okay. John, do you have something to say on that?
3 John Eads.
4 MR. EADS: Sure, let me just acknowledge 5
first that by letter dated April 27 th, the town of 6
Marlboro submitted a request, as they put it a 7
Petition for a hearing.
8 That request was postmarked by envelope, 9
I think it was May 15th. I don't know the two week 10 time difference there, but we did receive your 11 request.
12 It did not specify that it was submitted 13 in accordance with 2.309, which is the formal hearing 14 request process. I know that it was addressed to the 15 Secretary for their review, and I believe it's under 16 the review process as we speak.
17 I don't know that it fell under the formal 18 Petition for Hearing Process, submitted in accordance 19 with 2.309, which was specified in the Federal 20 Register Notice.
21 But we did receive your letter dated April 22 27th, and it is being processed.
23 MR. CAMERON: Okay, and we heard your 24 additional request today. Okay. Is Claire Chang with 25
68 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 us? Okay, let's go to, how about Sunny Miller and 1
Ischa Williams next. Sunny Miller? Ischa Williams?
2 (No response.)
3 MR. CAMERON: Okay, Elizabeth Wood? And 4
let's go to, let's go to Bill Burton. Bill?
5 MR. BURTON: Good afternoon. My name is 6
Bill Burton, I'm not an expert on energy, but I have 7
had some experience dealing with energy.
8 I'm a retired educator. I taught Physics, 9
Chemistry, Environmental Science, and a course 10 entitled Energy Economics and the Environment, for 11 about 35 years.
12 I taught in the public schools in Bellows 13 Falls(Phonetic), Vermont. I also did some teaching in 14 the Vermont State College System, and have been a 15 visiting lecturer at the University of Massachusetts, 16 Lowell.
17 I'm probably one of the few people here 18 from Windham County that endorses the re-licensing of 19 Vermont Yankee, and its, and hopefully looks upon with 20 the environmental issues, favorably.
21 In my experience as an energy teacher, I 22 probably visited almost every conceivable form of 23 electrical energy generation that exists. I've been 24 to large nuclear plants, coal-fired plants, oil-fired 25
69 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 plants, wood chip, solar, wind. You name it, I've 1
been there to learn more about the issues.
2 I feel that in any electrical generation, 3
no matter what type of process you are using, there 4
are benefits and risks. And I firmly believe that the 5
benefits of nuclear power, greatly exceed the risks.
6 I know a lot of you are in disagreement.
7 The main reason that I feel this way is other than 8
hydro-electric power, all of the other forms of 9
electrical generation involve carbon fuels.
10 Either coal, oil, natural gas, biomass, 11 you name it. All of these are going to produce gases 12 that are going to be harmful to the environment. They 13 are going to produce greenhouse gases.
14 And I know some people don't believe in 15 global warming, certainly the President of the United 16 States doesn't agree about global warming, but it does 17 exist. And I originally came from the state of Maine, 18 where we used to go fishing a lot in northern lakes.
19 Now there are no fish. Acid rain from 20 coal-fired plants. In those coal-fired plants there 21 is also -- I heard a comment from someone?
22 Would you like to come up and make, I 23 don't believe I bothered you while you were making 24 your comments, right, sir?
25
70 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MR. CAMERON: Okay.
1 MR. BURTON: Okay, thank you.
2 MR. CAMERON: All right.
3 MR. BURTON: All right. I knew the people 4
when they were called the Clam Shell Alliance, way 5
back.
6 All right, now getting back to the issues 7
that I want to deal with, I've been involved with a 8
lot of environmental issues. I'd like to consider 9
myself an Environmentalist.
10 Many of my students lived off the grid.
11 I've had students that have driven in wood-fired cars.
12 I have students who are living in straw houses. So 13 I've seen it all, and I believe that we have to have 14 nuclear power in order to exist, especially here in 15 the Northeast.
16 When I started teaching, oil was $2.00 a 17 barrel, now it's $70 something. When I was heating my 18 house with oil, it used to be 16 cents a gallon. I 19 pre-bought for $2.76 the other day. So the cost of 20 these fossil fuels that we use here in the Northeast, 21 are increasing so that I feel this year, many people 22 in Vermont, are going to freeze to death.
23 It's just going to be pretty bad when you 24 have to burn 1,000 gallons of oil in your house and 25
71 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 it's going to cost almost $3.00 a gallon. Who is 1
going to be able to afford it?
2 We've had no national energy policy.
3 We're talking about 20 years down the road. That's 4
short-term, 40 years down the road is short-term. I 5
started out dealing with energy in 1962, and one of my 6
students made a hydrogen fuel cell, that's how I got 7
enlightened in this thing.
8 1962, that's a lot of years ago. And I've 9
been involved in learning about energy for all these 10 years. All right, now, what's going to happen? I 11 really feel we not only need to re-license Vermont 12 Yankee, but we need more nuclear power plants 13 throughout the country.
14 Because fossil fuels are going to 15 diminish. China wants them, everybody else wants 16 them. They're polluting the atmosphere. They're 17 going to kill the earth in just a very, very few 18 decades.
19 Now with nuclear power we have the ability 20 to get the fuel right here in North America. We can 21 use nuclear power to generate electricity. We can use 22 nuclear power to electrolyze water and get hydrogen.
23 And hydrogen is going to be the fuel of the future.
24 And granted, there's a lot of things about 25
72 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 getting hydrogen from the source, the production, to 1
its use. It's a very small molecule, but we can drive 2
cars with hydrogen. We can heat with hydrogen, you 3
can do a lot of things.
4 So once we get a long-term energy policy, 5
it doesn't matter if you're a Republican or Democrat, 6
I don't know when it's going to come down the road, 7
but we need a long-term energy policy with nuclear 8
power, and hydrogen replacing gasoline.
9 Because I know, right here in town, we 10 have soybean oil for diesel and people are burning it.
11 That's fine, you're not using gasoline, but you're 12 polluting the atmosphere, just the same, with those 13 greenhouse gases.
14 So I'm convinced that we need a long-term 15 policy and I hope that some, it won't be in my 16 lifetime, but I guaranteed if you can look forward, 17 150 years from now, you're going to be driving around 18 in your hydrogen cars.
19 That's all I have to say, oh, by the way, 20 concerning fishing and so forth. I spent the last 21 weekend stocking salmon in the tributaries of the 22 Connecticut River, so I'm not, you know, a polluter.
23 I'm an Environmentalist, I'm a Fisherman, but I am 24 concerned about our energy future, not only in Vermont 25
73 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 but the United States. Thank you.
1 MR. CAMERON: Okay, thank you very much, 2
Mr. Burton. How about Mr. English, then Bernie 3
Buteau, and Dan Jeffries. Is Bob English here? Okay, 4
this is Mr. Robert English.
5 MR. ENGLISH: Hello. About 30 years ago 6
the Union of Concerned Scientists developed a program 7
that provided the way that the United States could be 8
70 percent solar-powered by the year 2000. Well, here 9
it's 2006, and we're talking about energy problems and 10 energy shortages.
11 Well, for the last 25 years, I've lived in 12 a solar home that I built, and I've lived off the grid 13 with solar electricity from portable tag panels. If 14 you came into my house, you wouldn't notice much 15 difference from your house.
16 I have computers, I have monitors, I have 17 televisions, I have a microwave. I have a washing 18 machine. I cook on electric hot plates in the summer 19 and I cook on a wood cook stove in the winter. I 20 don't use any oil to heat my house.
21 So when people tell you that we need to 22 risk the very ground that we stand on, that we need to 23 risk making it uninhabitable for 15 generations, in 24 order to heat our homes and have electricity, it 25
74 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 simply isn't true.
1 (Applause.)
2 MR. ENGLISH: Technologically we can solve 3
energy problems, we can do it without destroying the 4
environment. The problem is political and social. We 5
need to say we want renewable energy, we are not 6
willing to pay the price of the destruction of the 7
earth, to heat our homes.
8 We do not need to do that. Thank you.
9 (Applause.)
10 MR. CAMERON: Thank you, Mr. English. Is 11 Bernie here, Mr. Buteau, I'm not sure I'm pronouncing 12 that correctly.
13 (No response.)
14 MR. CAMERON: Okay, how about Mr. Jeffries, 15 Dan Jeffries? And Ted Sullivan? John Dreyfus?
16 (No response.)
17 MR. CAMERON: Okay, Carol, Carol Boyer. I 18 think Carol is here, isn't she? Carol, do you want to 19 come down and talk to us?
20 MS. BOYER: Hello, everyone, can you hear 21 me. This is my first experience attending a hearing 22 of this sort, and I had actually not planned to speak.
23 What I would like to say is to build on 24 what the last speaker described, which is his 25
75 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 experience living with a solar home.
1 I'm imagining how good it must feel to 2
know that you're meeting your basic needs without 3
adding anything to the debt that we, as humans, have 4
accumulated in our attempts to meet our needs, and 5
also in our, really, we're so full of ideas and we can 6
do so many things, we seem to have lost track of our 7
relationship to the larger circle of life.
8 And I would like to suggest that we follow 9
up and that each of us become responsible for learning 10 that, for example, our own Department of Energy has 11 very firm studies that clearly tell us that if we 12 exerted the political and social will, we would have 13 no need for any of the risky enterprises that we use 14 now to meet our needs for energy and heat.
15 I'm not going to repeat what was just said 16 about the time table on this, but I would like to say, 17 say it this way. That we need to be forward thinking.
18 And my sense is that nuclear power is kind of passe.
19 We've all looked at this. We see what the 20 risks are, and there are huge chunks in Russia that 21 have been, in their terms, withdrawn from public use, 22 for the foreseeable future because of an accident.
23 And, as far as I know, nobody has repealed 24 Murphy's Law. So I'd like to suggest that we be 25
76 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 responsible and that we get this message today that we 1
are asking all of you to look beyond what has become 2
an old mantra, and make use of the truly up-to-date 3
technology, that could allow all of us to feel good 4
about living our lives without adding to the 5
environmental burdens. Thank you.
6 (Applause.)
7 MR. CAMERON: We thank you, Carol. Nancy, 8
Nancy Nelkin.
9 MS. NELKIN: Hi, I'm Nancy Nelkin, I'm from 10 Western Mass, I'm an educator. I guess I wanted to 11 start out with the comment, I think it was Rich. He 12 said something about us being, referring to us as the 13 public experts.
14 That was flattering, however, I think 15 there are really only a few true experts among us, 16 like Ray Shadis. I think part of the problem is, as 17 taxpayers, we're paying the NRC as our employees, to 18 be the knowledgeable representatives of public 19 interest.
20 The NRC is responsible for overseeing the 21 nuclear industry. And when they do a poor job, they 22 risk our health and well being, when you do not 23 rigorously and objectively evaluate the impacts of 24 nuclear power on us.
25
77 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 my understanding with this license 1
renewal process, there's a safety review. And you're 2
talking about looking at aging management. And I 3
still ask when will you determine when a nuclear plant 4
is not environmentally or otherwise, fit to continue.
5 I get the feeling that as long as you can 6
put a band aid on this or tighten a screw here, that 7
you will continue to run the nuclear reactors, which 8
really has more benefits for the corporations that run 9
them, than for us, as the people who live in the area.
10 Because we have to live with the effects 11 on the Connecticut River. We have to live with the 12 effects on our health, increased cancers. These are 13 things that need to be looked seriously, by the NRC, 14 in this process.
15 Not to mention the nuclear waste that's 16 stored in our backyard. It's bad enough that it's 17 already there, it's at risk by an accident. It's at 18 risk by criminal act.
19 And the company is resisting taking 20 measures to make that more safe. I want that to be 21 considered in this process. And if we continue to re-22 license the plant, we will have that much more nuclear 23 waste.
24 In fact, it will be, the nuclear waste 25
78 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 will reach its capacity and go beyond. I want to add 1
that I question this assumption that we need more and 2
more energy and that the only choices are centralized 3
forms of energy that use fossil fuels, coal that uses, 4
5 This is not an automatic assumption. One 6
aspect of this renewal, as I understand it, is to 7
consider alternatives. And I want to ask my 8
neighbors, who live in this area, to really look 9
seriously at alternatives.
10 There are so many renewable options.
11 There's solar, there's wind, and people have a way of 12 making it sound like, oh, well you know you really 13 can't do that, that's not practical. That's not true.
14 It's very practical, it's very doable.
15 This is an article that's very low researched. It's 16 being done in other countries. It's being done in 17 Western Europe.
18 People are putting solar panels on their 19 homes and getting paid by the utility for producing 20 that electricity. So we need to open our minds and 21 not get into an either/or situation where people 22 saying well coal plants are so bad for the environment 23 and it's making, causing global warming.
24 So we have to run the other way to 25
79 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 nuclear. You have to really think hard about all of 1
the nuclear waste that's going to be with us forever.
2 And will Entergy be with us forever.
3 Will they be footing the bill to take care 4
of that, forever. As long as it takes for the 5
radiation to dissipate.
6 So I just, I'm pleading with the NRC to 7
take a really objective and rigorous approach to this.
8 I think that, you know, all of the areas that we have 9
to look at are out there. Thank you.
10 (Applause.)
11 MR. CAMERON: Thank you, Nancy. Is Mike 12 Hame here, by any chance? Or a Mr. Peyton?
13 (No response.)
14 MR. CAMERON: Let's go to, Sally, Sally 15 Shaw, do you want to talk?
16 MS. SHAW: (off mic.)
17 MR. CAMERON: Thank you, Sally, for 18 sending, you're going to send the comments and then 19 we'll go to Sally, Sally Shaw, thank you.
20 MS. SHAW: In the interest of full 21 disclosure, I work for New England Coalition, but I'm 22 speaking here today as a Resident of the ten mile EPZ.
23 I live in Gill, Massachusetts.
24 As an ecologist, I'm compelled to point 25
80 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 out that environmental impacts are multi-variate 1
impacts. They are not generic. Life is not generic.
2 And although biological systems are resilient and they 3
recover from damage, radiation exposure causes genetic 4
impacts that will change life forever.
5 Genetic damage can be passed on to our 6
offspring and theirs. It can change biological 7
communities forever. I submit that the very idea of 8
a GEIS is sheis. In NRC's Executive Summary of their 9
Generic Environmental Impact Statement, which I 10 consider an oxymoron.
11 They state that among the 150 million 12 people who live within 50 miles of a U.S. Nuclear 13 Power Plant, I prefer to call it a reactor, not a 14 plant. About 30 million who will die of spontaneous 15 cancers.
16 That's one in five people, by their 17 calculations. And they say that since we can't prove 18 a one of them was caused by radiation, therefore the 19 NRC doesn't have to worry about them, note bene.
20 They admit that five calculated fatalities 21 associated with nuclear powered induced cancers will 22 occur. So I ask which one of us, or our children, 23 living within 50 miles, will die of radiation induced 24 cancer, over the lifetime of this plant.
25
81 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's the cost of progress. Tough luck, 1
sucker. Most of the people who die of radiation 2
induced cancers, will live within ten miles.
3 Thus, there's a very good possibility that 4
we will know, we in this room, will know some of them.
5 At last count, my husband and I counted, between us, 6
28 people we know who have died or are living with 7
cancer, in our extended community.
8 Can I prove that their cancers are 9
radiation related? No. Therefore, the effects, the 10 impact of these deaths, on our life, is considered by 11 the NRC to be of small significance.
12 The Executive Summary of the 600 some odd 13 page Environmental Impact Statement, is full of little 14 items like that. Here's another. The staff concludes 15 that the generic analysis of a severe accident, 16 applies to all reactors.
17 The probability weighted consequences of 18 atmospheric releases fall out onto open bodies of 19 water, groundwater releases and the societal and 20 economic impacts are of small significance, for all 21 reactors.
22 That, with the stroke of a pen, wipes out 23 all our concerns. They also conclude that the 24 environmental impacts of design-basis accidents, are 25
82 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 of small significance for all plants.
1 And, because additional measures to reduce 2
such impacts would be costly, don't worry, they won't 3
burden the Licensee with extra mitigations.
4 At a recent ACRS hearing in Rockville, 5
Maryland, NRC staff, I think maybe it was NRR staff, 6
testified that in a design-basis accident or loss of 7
cooling accident, under upgraded conditions, which 8
they're not looking at, of course, with this re-9 licensing thing.
10 The entire quantity of the core would be 11 released in about 30 seconds. And accident impacts 12 after uprate, are greater than the 20 percent uprate, 13 they may approach 40 percent, maybe more.
14 And this might result in a 500 roentgen 15 exposure at the limiting location, which happens to be 16 very near a residence, which happens to be on the 17 plant perimeter.
18 I submit that such an accident would have 19 a significant impact on the person or family living 20 there. So I would ask the NRC to recalculate. That 21 goes on and on, I'm going to skip.
22 In the Appendices of the GEIS, your 23 estimates of risk quantities, for early fatalities, 24 normalized doses and cost, were made using an aptly 25
83 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 named crack code. We know about cracks.
1 Our steam dryer has 62 of them, at last 2
count. And it uses the middle year of current 3
license, or the flat part of the bathtub curve that 4
nuclear scientists know represent the stability or the 5
stable running of nuclear plants.
6 Experience shows that Vermont Yankee 7
exceeded radiation release limits, several times 8
during the early part of its life. Theory predicts, 9
as it ages, it will release more again.
10 NRC variances, such as doubling the 11 allowable main steam line leak rate, exempting Entergy 12 from doing the ten-year primary containment leak rate 13 test that was supposed to have been done in 2005.
14 All of that implies to me that the theory 15 is correct, and they don't want to find out. And then 16 there's the small fact that Entergy is negotiating 17 with Vermont and the NRC to mask their actual 18 releases, with a 29 percent discount.
19 That's been discussed at other meetings.
20 I think the jury is still out on that one, but I can 21 take a really good guess how it will go. I propose to 22 the NRC that you come up with a more realistic way to 23 model dose, since the bathtub is overflowing and with 24 the uprate and the license extension, you're going 25
84 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 beyond the rim of the bathtub.
1 So your middle year of current license 2
criteria, seems to me, flawed. New and significant 3
information.
4 I would like to submit the BEIR 7 Report 5
of the National Academy of Sciences. The biological 6
effects of ionizing radiation. The National Academy 7
of Sciences told us that, in fact, there is not a 8
threshold dose phenomenon.
9 The GEIS presupposes a threshold dose 10 phenomenon. Therefore, it claims that it does make 11 sense to normalize early fatalities. That's based on 12 the BEIR 5 Report, not BEIR 7.
13 I
would like to suggest that you 14 recalculate using the conclusions of BEIR 7. What 15 does BEIR 7 say about radiation risks to workers under 16 exposure of one REM per year. That was another little 17 nugget in the Appendices of the GEIS.
18 I'm just curious. I would love to see 19 that calculated. I think your Appendix E.4.1.2 is 20 faulty, also based on BEIR 7, because it's based on 21 the notion of a threshold of effects. That does not 22 seem to be the case.
23 Your Appendices E.8.2, these Appendices 24 show the tables and the calculations behind a lot of 25
85 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 their conclusions in the GEIS.
1 Quantities and
- units, assumes non-2 stochastic effects will not occur if the dose 3
equivalent from internal and external sources 4
combined, is less than 50 rems or fewer in a year.
5 This, too, contradicts the conclusions of 6
the BEIR 7 Study. Your cost estimates also use BEIR 7
5, not 7, and the costs are based on 1980 costs, or 8
maybe they were updated to 1994, 12 years ago.
9 In my experience, prices have changed 10 quite a bit in that 12 years. The other thing, 11 quarrel I have with your cost estimates, is that you 12 skip Indian Point, hypothetical accident costs for 13 Indian Point.
14 I don't blame the NRC for skipping Indian 15 Point. Lots of folks live down there. The cost of an 16 accident would be astronomical, but it's not good 17 science to leave out a big outlier like that, in this 18 case.
19 I would just like to pause for a second, 20 to say this is really crazy. No other power 21 generation source comes close to having to expend so 22 much money and so much energy, just to convince us 23 that it won't kill thousands of us.
24 If Entergy, Excelon and others just 25
86 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 invested in wind and solar, none of this would be 1
necessary.
2 (Applause.)
3 MS. SHAW: I do hope that you will consider 4
that possibility in your NEPA required look at 5
alternatives to re-licensing ENVY.
6 The tax-funded labor costs of the NRC, 7
ACRS, ASLB, etcetera, etcetera, would be eliminated.
8 Please, save our tax dollars, we need them. In 9
Appendix E, I think it was Page E-43, we talk about 10 ALARA limits.
11 That stands for As Low As Reasonably 12 Achievable. These are radiation exposure limits for 13 workers. And they were derived using analytic 14 techniques to identify the approximate point at which 15 the cost of providing additional protection, would 16 exceed the risk averted.
17 You see, it sounds like apples and oranges 18 to me, so I'm just curious what, this is a question, 19 I guess I missed the question part, I should have 20 asked it then.
21 But what dollar value do you place on a 22 workers life? I'm just curious. I guess I'll 23 conclude with saying that it seems to me that your 24 Generic Environmental Impact Statement is fatally 25
87 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 flawed, in many ways.
1 Recalculations of early fatalities and 2
latent fatalities, are biased. They are based on old 3
information, BEIR 5, not BEIR 7, and I humbly request 4
that you recalculate them based on the most currently 5
available knowledge on the effects of radiation.
6 Particularly, low level radiation. Thank 7
you, Chip.
8 MR. CAMERON: Thank you, Sally.
9 (Applause.)
10 MR. CAMERON: Could we, could we have 11 someone from the NRC staff answer Sally's question?
12 Not right now, but at the end of the meeting. She has 13 a question, if anybody can answer that for her, I 14 would appreciate it.
15 Our next speakers are going to be, first 16 we're going to go to Mandy Arms, then to Sally Kotkov, 17 and then to Bill Wittmer. Mandy? Okay, how about 18 Sarah, Sarah Kotkov? And then we'll go to Mr.
19 Wittmer.
20 MR. KOTKOV: Hi, I'm on the Board of New 21 England Coalition, but my comments are my own personal 22 views. At the outset, Rani said that, apologized for 23 the weather. And I like to say that I don't think the 24 that the weather is the reason that a larger number of 25
88 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 people have not come out this afternoon.
1 I think that many of us are quite 2
disgusted by the fact that the Atomic Safety and 3
Licensing Board has recently refused to hear, or 4
refused to accept the contentions, the new contentions 5
of New England Coalition, based solely on their lack 6
of timeliness in filing.
7 And yet, in a few weeks, we'll have 8
another one of these public meetings. We think that 9
these decisions, the decisions on uprate and on re-10 licensing, are based, and should be based on science 11 and engineering, and to have a show of soliciting the 12 views of the citizens, many of us believe is a sham 13 and a travesty and I think that is why people have not 14 shown up today, not because it's a little bit rainy.
15 As a citizen living here in Guilford, 16 frankly I didn't think much about the power plant 17 until 9/11, and then I thought a lot about the fuel 18 pool and the risk of terrorism here.
19 Frankly, my only hope is that a terrorist 20 would find this area too boring. The NRC, I think, 21 thinks that the low population density here is a 22 reason not to pay more attention to the safety of this 23 outdated and aging structure.
24 The Mark 1 containment requires that the 25
89 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 fuel pool be high up in the air, where it is not 1
shielded by being below grade, as some other plants 2
are. Here it's 70 feet in the air and it's, of 3
course, highly vulnerable to attack by aircraft. When 4
this plant was built, it was intended to hold the 5
fuel, what's called spent fuel, which is, of course, 6
highly, highly radioactive and dangerous.
7 It was intended to hold this fuel for six 8
months. Now, of course, there's 33 years of fuel in 9
the pool, there will be another seven by the time the 10 license expires.
11 And now we are looking at the prospect of 12 another 20 years beyond that, of fuel. And, of 13 course, when the fuel, after the fuel is in the pool 14 for five years, and then it's cooled sufficiently to 15 put in dry casks, we're looking at the prospect of 16 many, many more casks on the banks of the Connecticut 17 River, where this, of course, also a terrorist target.
18 Especially if Entergy gets its way and 19 does not even have to provide berms around the casks.
20 And, of course, there's also a flooding danger. In 21 1991, there was a study regarding the construction of 22 a low-level waste repository down on the plant 23 grounds, and it was deemed not wise.
24 Now we're, of course, looking at high 25
90 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 level waste on the plant grounds. I think that's all 1
I have to say, thank you.
2 (Applause.)
3 MR. CAMERON: Thank you. We're going to go 4
to Mr. Wittmer, then Joyce Morin, then Linda Madkom.
5 Is Mr. Wittmer still here?
6 (No response.)
7 MR. CAMERON: Okay, how about Joyce Morin?
8 Mr. Madkom?
9 (No response.)
10 MR. CAMERON: Gary? Gary Sachs. And then 11 after Gary we'll go to Ann Elizabeth Howes. Gary 12 Sachs.
13 MR.
SACHS:
Nuclear is not cheap 14 electricity. Protect the waste for 100,000 years, 15 tell us how much that's going to cost. Spend some of 16 that money to protect that waste, and then tell us 17 it's cheap, affordable or inexpensive electricity.
18 I challenge you on that. To anyone who 19 claims that there was a benefit to nuclear power, 20 please show me this cost benefit analysis, including 21 the price of dealing with this waste.
22 Because the rate we're given as for the 23 power purchase agreement, from 2002, does not tell us 24 the true cost of the economics behind this.
25
91 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 It was great for you to hear Ms. Banfield 1
refer to the Department of Public Service Studies. I 2
intend tonight, at tonight's meeting, to bring more 3
economic data on how that Department of Public Service 4
Study breaks down and to actually how much per person 5
that will cost, if we didn't have Vermont Yankee 6
starting in this year or in a couple of years.
7 And one of my concerns, when I hear the 8
NRC at this meeting, in regard to the data that they 9
use for their studies, is that they take much of their 10 data, not from their own sources, but from the 11 Licensee. And, in my opinion, that's poor practice.
12 (Applause.)
13 MR. SACHS: For those people here, who have 14 less experience than some of us who live locally, 15 who've been following this issue for quite a while, 16 this re-licensing issue is actually about no moving 17 parts.
18 It's not about dry cask storage. It's not 19 about the uprate. It's not about the evacuation plan.
20 And it's not about any moving parts in the reactor 21 itself. Just so you know.
22 And to relate to that man who spoke 23 earlier, who was the teacher in Bellows Falls. In 24 order for nuclear to cover the carbon-based emissions, 25
92 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 better used in coal and in natural gas plants, 1
etcetera, we would have to have a new nuclear power 2
plant built every two weeks, between now and 2050. I 3
don't think that's going to happen, sir.
4 Last Friday, the Ninth Circuit Court in 5
California stated the
- NRC, in doing these 6
Environmental Impact Statements, must take into 7
account risk of terrorism.
8 And here at Vermont Yankee we have a 9
radioactive water pond, that is 60 feet up, covered by 10 basically an aluminum, corrugated aluminum roof that 11 has a breakaway roof with a pound and a half pressure 12 per square inch.
13 To me that, I'm not sure what level of 14 containment we have at Vermont Yankee, and I'd like 15 that addressed in whatever this Environmental Impact 16 Study is that you all are planning.
17 Richard Monson of the Harvard School of 18 Public Health stated, quote, the scientific research 19 base shows that there is no threshold below which low 20 levels of ionizing radiation can be demonstrated to be 21 harmless or beneficial.
22 I'm going to repeat that. There is no 23 threshold below which low levels of ionizing radiation 24 can be demonstrated to be harmless or beneficial. The 25
93 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 health risks, particularly the development of solid 1
cancers in organs, rise proportionately with exposure.
2 At low doses of radiation, the risk of inducing solid 3
cancers is very small.
4 As the overall lifetime exposure 5
increases, so does the risk. Every nuclear reactor 6
emits small amounts of radiation. Even, supposedly, 7
zero-emission reactors.
8 On March 31st, 2004, the NRC arrived in 9
Vernon, Vermont to inform us that they would not be 10 performing the independent engineering assessment that 11 had been a requirement, put on the uprate by the State 12 Public Service Board.
13 For anybody who knows that they did do the 14 independent engineering assessment, in my opinion, the 15 NRC is not to be trusted. 5-4-04 the NRC changed its 16 tune and announced that it had long been planning such 17 an independent engineering assessment.
18 You, the NRC, say that Three Mile Island 19 was a wake up call for the industry. That was March 20 28th, 1979. That same year the NRC publicly stated 21 that there was no such thing as a safe amount of 22 radiation.
23 Since 1979, I'm going to list some of the 24 events that have occurred. February 11 th, 1981, 25
94 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Tennessee Valley Authorities, Sequoia One Plant in 1
Tennessee. A rookie operator caused a 110,000 gallon 2
radioactive coolant release.
3 January 25th, `82, the Ginna Plant near 4
Rochester, New York, a steam generator pipe broke.
5 Fifteen thousand gallons of radioactive coolant 6
spilled. Small amounts of radioactive steam escaped 7
into the air.
8 January 15th and 16th, 1983, Brown's Ferry 9
Station. Nearly 208,000 gallons of low level 10 radioactive contaminated water was accidently dumped 11 into the Tennessee River.
12 1981, `82, and `83, Salem One and Two in 13 New Jersey. Ninety seconds from catastrophe when the 14 plant was shut down manually, after the failure of an 15 automatic shut down system.
16 A 3,000 gallon radioactive water leak in 17 June of `81. A 23,000 gallon leak of mildly 18 radioactive water, which splashed onto 16 workers by 19
-the-by, in February of `82.
20 And radioactive gas leaks in March of `81, 21 and September of `82. Then, in 1996, NRC Chairperson 22 Shirley Jackson, speaking of Millstone in Time 23 Magazine, quote, clearly the NRC dropped the ball. We 24 won't do it again.
25
95 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 1997, Yankee Rowe, 20 miles of here. In 1
the process of closing it, they determined they had 2
found that they had dumped, for 30 years, radioactive 3
water into the Deerfield River. Many people swim 4
downstream from that river.
5 February 15 th, 2000, New York's Indian 6
Point Two, aging steam generator ruptured, venting 7
radioactive steam. The NRC initially reported no 8
radioactive material released.
9 They later changed their report to say 10 there was a leak, but not enough to threaten public 11 safety. Wait, didn't the NRC in 1979, say there's no 12 such thing as a safe amount of radiation? Hmm.
13 2004, new NRC Chairman Nils Diaz, about 14 Davis Besse, said the Agency, quote, dropped the ball 15 again. Hmm. A lot of balls getting dropped by the 16 NRC.
17 If Three Mile Island was a wake up call, 18 were you guys asleep at the control panel during these 19 other events, or just napping. I heard someone refer 20 earlier to the fact that Mr. Emch has been involved 21 with the NRC for 30 years.
22 That means he's been involved since before 23 you guys knew what you're doing to apparently the mid 24 to late `80s, when you claimed to have a handle on 25
96 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 these events and not be making mistakes any longer.
1 Okay, so here we are in a NRC meeting.
2 Please tell me how the NRC does not stand for nobody 3
really cares? The environmental impact of Vermont 4
Yankee.
5 We have an ineffective evacuation plan, 6
which has been untested in its entirety. What about 7
those people who don't have vehicles? What about the 8
daycare centers and all the schools being tested 9
together?
10 What about the transient local members in 11 the community who are in hotels? A worst case 12 scenario accident at Vermont Yankee would lead to an 13 area the size of western Mass, Vermont and New 14 Hampshire, being uninhabitable for possibly 30 or more 15 years.
16 The plumes from the National Aeronautics 17 and Atmospherics Administration, shows plumes going as 18 far north as deep into Canada, over Montpelier. As 19 far south as North Carolina, and as far east as over 20 Cape Cod.
21 Getting the Ninth Circuit Court's decision 22 last week, it appears that the NRC has some excuses to 23 make. In 2001, just a month before 9/11, Vermont 24 Yankee failed the Operational Safety
Response
25
97 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 Drill of the NRC.
1 In this drill, mock attackers, who work 2
for the NRC, tried to enter the Control Room by 3
getting over the fence and past security at Vermont 4
Yankee.
5 Prior to the test, the time and where the 6
mock attackers would be coming from, was told to the 7
Security. The mock attackers were able to enter the 8
Control Room, got past the Security and VY won the 9
notoriety, calling itself the least secure nuclear 10 station in the country.
11 Needless to say, the NRC no longer does 12 that test. I have a question that comes up, that I 13 didn't ask in the beginning of the meeting, which is, 14 on what do you base radiation exposure? Is it the 15 ICRP? International Committee on Radiological 16 Protection?
17 Or is it on the European, on the European 18 Committee on Radiation Risk? Thank you.
19 MR. CAMERON: Okay, thank you, Gary.
20 (Applause.)
21 MR. CAMERON: So that we can go on with 22 other speakers I would just ask, again, if any of the 23 NRC staff has the information about, that Gary is 24 asking about, please talk with him.
25
98 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 have a few more speakers and then I'm 1
going to ask one of the Senior NRC people to close out 2
the afternoon meeting. And I believe this is, this is 3
Ann Elizabeth Howes, and then we're going to go to 4
David McElwee, Debra Reger, and Cora Brooks. Ann 5
Elizabeth.
6 MS. HOWES: I'm a common citizen with 7
relatively low technical education. And I haven't 8
pursued the subject at all.
9 I guess it was last week when we had the 10 17 low level warning system and we had to replace the 11 blower. But, you know, I rarely stay up late and I 12 was watching movies, and at about 5:00 I went upstairs 13 and I could see the dawn approaching and I thought, 14 well, I mean it was probably 4:00.
15 I was feeling, it's dark out. Like we've 16 lost power somewhere, it's very quiet and still. And 17 that's kind of like a tiny, little feeling of fear, 18 but that the experts are taking care of it, and I went 19 to bed as I usually do.
20 And I really think I probably will, I 21 don't really think that I'm an important member of the 22 experience. I kind of compare it to the feelings I 23 had when the World Trade Towers collapsed, that I sort 24 of felt as though I was an American adult and, you 25
99 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 know, with nothing to stress my life.
1 I was experiencing stress, and when the 2
Towers collapsed I felt something has been shut off.
3 And when experiencing a profound natural peace.
4 And I run on little dreams, every once in 5
a while, like an indication in my house, I have a 6
kitchen leak. And I think we had cracks in the blower 7
or something like, cracks in the towers that we had to 8
think about.
9 And I'm like, just a little animal out 10 there and I'm getting the same poetic feeling that 11 there's, you know, stretch marks in the towers and 12 people are concerned about the foundation.
13 And this afternoon I hear, you know, it's 14 sitting on the Connecticut River, and I have an odd 15 dream. That the Connecticut River runs on top of a 16 little shell that is a dirt shell.
17 And that a disruption the size of Vermont 18 Yankee, would cause the river to disappear into a 19 gorge and emerge further downstream. I haven't 20 verified that, though I do think that we're 21 technologically capable enough to check on that.
22 This afternoon is the first time, maybe 23 the second time I've heard that the reactor is 70 feet 24 in the air, which is a decision as to whether or not 25
100 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 any kind of explosion would suck water and dirt into 1
the air and emit, you know, to the hills, but it would 2
probably be buffeted. Like there is a higher rate of 3
survivor-hood, on the other side of the mountains from 4
Hiroshima.
5 That it's at, you're buffeted by the 6
earth. There's one other detail. I feel as though we 7
have gotten excited to secure the strength of the 8
foundation.
9 But I also feel as though it's in our own, 10 honest, personal assessment, as animals working in the 11 reactor, that it's an older, radioactive installation.
12 And my feeling is that we would experience a kind of 13 removal of the radioactive jewelry.
14 A reduction of the vin diagrams of 15 overloaded electromagnetic force fields that is 16 causing a depression of our circulatory systems, our 17 blood chemistry.
18 But if we were to stop the creation of 19 nuclear waste, and stop our mental dependence on 20 extremely bright street lights. Over, hugely over 21 air-conditioned environments and brought our 22 electrical usage, personally at home, down to 23 seriously conservative levels, that we would feel some 24 relaxation of social economic status stress, that is 25
101 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 equation of the success of industrial America.
1 And it's, you know, you're at that big 2
decision point in your life, where you straighten up 3
and start respecting incredible simplicity, and really 4
learn solar panel.
5 Really contemplate wind farms and harness 6
the hydro-electric potential in the rivers and streams 7
and waterfalls. And gauge down to accepting that as 8
the amount of electricity that you can look at and 9
use.
10 I grew up in the automotive industry, I 11 don't drive a car. I haven't gotten it together. But 12 I know that I have to respect the integrity of the 13 industry, the transport of food, I mean, dependent on 14 stores and supermarkets and the refrigeration factor.
15 But I had also another dream. And it's 16 sort of coming around to, you know, this last week of 17 level low emergency, that there is a metallic fatigue 18 that's like you know you have an automobile, and you 19 have seen three of them in ten years.
20 Because you have a job, you can shift out 21 of one automobile into another one, but there's that 22 rest factor that's going on all the time.
23 MR. CAMERON: I hate to interrupt you, but 24 could you finish up for us, please, so we can get in 25
102 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 all the speakers.
1 MS. HOWES: So my fear, my point is to get 2
behind security as the fun end that you're capable to 3
cope with that puzzle.
4 MR. CAMERON: Thank you. Thank you very 5
much, Ann Elizabeth. We're going to go to David 6
McElwee, at this point, and then we have Debra Reger, 7
Cora Brooks and Beth Adams.
8 MR. MCELWEE: My name is David McElwee and, 9
in this spirit of full disclosure tonight, I'm an 10 Engineer at Vermont Yankee, and I also live in the ten 11 mile EPZ.
12 I could talk about the safe operation of 13 the plant, as an Engineer at Vermont Yankee. But 14 today I'd like to talk as a resident of the area, not 15 as an employee of Vermont Yankee, but to talk a little 16 bit about 20 additional years of the operation of 17 Vermont Yankee.
18 Because 20 years in the future, we need to 19 do something about the environment, about greenhouse 20 gases. My wife and I have lived in West Brattleboro 21 for nearly 30 years.
22 We own and operate a small business in 23 town. I've raised two children here and feel very 24 lucky that we have been able to join the rural country 25
103 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 setting and lifestyle that's been afforded to us.
1 Prior to working at Vermont Yankee, I 2
taught school in a public school system in a local 3
high school. Part of my teaching was in the area of 4
science, where my students and I would look at the 5
environment and the effects that fossil fuels had on 6
it.
7 Greenhouse gas emissions are a real 8
problem and we need to do something about it. We need 9
to stop relying on fossil fuels for the generation of 10 electricity and turn more towards nuclear energy.
11 Nuclear energy is safe, clean and readily 12 available for use in this country, and it does not 13 contribute to the greenhouse gas emissions and helps 14 keep our green mountains green.
15 To not allow Vermont Yankee to operate an 16 additional 20 years, would be a significant impact on 17 our environment. I'm very proud to be a member of 18 this community, and also to have spent the last 25 19 years working at Vermont Yankee.
20 Vermont Yankee is a safe, well run plant 21 and is a great asset to the area. It provides good 22 paying jobs, provides an infrastructure to attract new 23 businesses to the area.
24 To help, and help eliminate tons of 25
104 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 pollutants that would otherwise be put into the air 1
that we breathe. And I look forward to another 20 2
years of operation at Vermont Yankee, and hope that 3
the NRC will approve the license renewal application.
4 Thank you.
5 MR. CAMERON: Okay, Debra Reger, I'm not 6
sure I pronounced that correctly. Is this Debra?
7 MS. REGER: Yes.
8 MR. CAMERON: Oh, good, okay. So we have 9
a duo or duet?
10 MS. REGER: Martha is part of my Affinity 11 Group and I asked her to just stand with me for 12 support, if that's okay.
13 MR. CAMERON: This is Leftover Affinity?
14 MS. REGER: Yes, we're leftovers and since 15 it's our turn to talk, I just want to have the 16 appropriate banner. Shut It Down Now, it says. I'm 17 from central Vermont, near Montpelier, and I think 18 this is so important that I drove two hours, with my 19 Affinity Group, to be here.
20 (Applause.)
21 MS. REGER: So, I did want to start with, 22 I really believe that we are trespassing with this 23 nuclear power plant on a fragile web of life on our 24 dear planet, the Mother Earth.
25
105 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 So I speak from my heart, with these 1
concerns. I think the uranium that's mined to operate 2
this nuclear power plant, is coming from native land, 3
from very, people that have lived for over 30, what, 4
40 years, with the tailings of the uranium mining.
5 And why doesn't the environmental scoping 6
include the people that live, you know, with these 7
tailings, with the still births and the water, from 8
the water, from the polluted water, from the polluted 9
air.
10 And now we're going full cycle with 11 storing of radioactive waste back on the Indian 12 Reservations. I don't think this is fair. I don't 13 think there's been any, you know, where does the 14 generic scoping, you know, where does that fit in.
15 (Applause.)
16 MS. REGER: You want to use coal. What is 17 this group, Vermont Energy Partnership, you know, they 18 want to use coal that's that's taken from the Mother 19 Earth. The water in the slurry. The Peabody Coal has 20 been doing this for like 20 years, using all that 21 precious water. We're running out of water.
22 You know here we have the threat of the 23 radioactive, you know polluting the Connecticut water.
24 You know they'd rather use coal but they're gonna, you 25
106 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 know transport it by coal slurry. You know, it's not 1
fair that the corporations, you know get away with 2
this.
3 I want to thank all the grandmothers, and 4
the mothers, since November, have risked arrest here 5
in Brattleboro, and have stood, you know in the lobby 6
of Entergy* [phonetic], and have stood at the gates of 7
Vermont Yankee, and where is it that we have to send 8
our grandmothers and mothers to risk arrest? What 9
does that say?
10 And maybe we don't have the auditorium 11 full today, but I know that people don't want to live 12 with this risk anymore, and it's really not fair.
13 Okay. I want to speak to alternatives. In my home 14 town of Corinth, we publish Northern Woodlands 15 magazine. Last month--I want to give these, I don't 16 have enough for all 25 employees, but I want to give 17 you all a copy to read tonight in your hotel. "Energy 18 From Wood: Turning Woodchips Into Power, Heat and 19 Ethanol." We have the answers. We have the 20 alternatives. We've listened to Amory Levans*
21
[phonetic], Rocky Mountain Institute, and other 22 experts. We can use energy efficiency.
23 Finally, Vermont just passed a bill that 24 we will be selling appliances that really turn off 25
107 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 when you turn them off. You know it seems like a 1
little thing but all this stuff will really add up.
2 We have the program in Vermont, Vermont Efficiency.
3 We can like use this and we don't need the 4
power from this nuke; we really don't. So I want to 5
give you all a copy of this to read tonight, and I 6
guess in closing, I just want to thank my affinity 7
group for coming down, especially to Martha, this is--
8 and Monica, and Sal.
9 MR. : [off-microphone comment]
10 MS. REGER: Yeah. It is really difficult 11 to--you know, workers do have a choice. We protested 12 a lot, as the New Hampshire Women's Peace Network, at 13 Sanders, in New Hampshire, in Nashua, New Hampshire.
14 They were making parts for the cruise missile.
15 And, you know you do have a choice. Every 16 worker has a choice. I don't think it's our job to 17 provide alternative jobs, but we can convert that 18 plant, we can still have a good economy, we can 19 convert that plant, run it on gas, like I said we can 20 use alternatives and provide the same amount of 21 energy.
22 I do feel that people need to look within 23 when--and all you guys that work for the Nuclear 24 Regulatory Commission, you know, I don't know how you 25
108 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 can sleep at night. I really don't.
1 So that's all I'm gonna say.
2 MR. CAMERON: All right. Thank you very 3
much. And thank you for the magazines too.
4 Cora. So we have Cora and Beth, and then 5
we're going to have Rani Franovich close the meeting 6
for us.
7 Cora.
8 MS. BROOKS: I found a country journal 9
from 1980, and I thought, well, I wondered why I had 10 saved it. There was a nice article about mushrooms in 11 it. And then I kept looking through it--and I just 12 found it this week, and there's an article about 13 Vermont Yankee from 1980, about the town of Vernon, 14 and how much anxiety--1980, we're talking about. How 15 much anxiety exists in the communities around this 16 plant. And not only does this plant--let's say it--
17 causes cancer, causes cancer of unborn, yet unborn 18 children. Not only does it cause cancer, it causes 19 heart attacks for the anxiety that people live with.
20 People are in denial as much as possible, 21 the way you are when somebody dies. In some 22 religions, you come back a year later to make sure no 23 one has seen that person. Because it's hard to 24 believe when somebody dies. It's hard to believe that 25
109 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 nuclear plant that's serving your community and 1
the state of Vermont, and is giving jobs to a lot of 2
the people that you know and care about, that's hard, 3
to feel that it's a shaky situation.
4 Now Copernicus and Galileo suggested the 5
most outrageous thing. They said, you know, the sun 6
doesn't rise in the east and set in the west. The 7
world turns around. Now we also know that the world 8
wobbles. I'm not making this up.
9 The scientists. I have a New York Times 10 headline that says the world wobbles, the sun rings 11 like a bell. The scientists know that. We know that 12 there are volcanoes that erupt. We know that there is 13 lightning that strikes. We know that this year alone, 14 there have been three or four significant coal mine 15 operations that have faltered and killed people.
16 The light isn't very good for me here but 17 I am going to try and read to you from this article 18 that was written by David Riley in 1980.
19 Country Journal. A few of the Vermont 20 Yankee, up until 1980, wobbles. High-pressure turbine 21 leaks shut down 82 hours9.490741e-4 days <br />0.0228 hours <br />1.35582e-4 weeks <br />3.1201e-5 months <br />. That was in 1973. 4-27-74, 22 following scheduled shutdown, plant restricted to 80 23 percent power output due to excessive radioactivity 24 levels in off-gas system.
25
110 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 5-24-74. Leaks in drywall exterior, 1
containment vessel shut eleven days. Again '74.
2 Multiple lightning strikes, shut down 75 hours8.680556e-4 days <br />0.0208 hours <br />1.240079e-4 weeks <br />2.85375e-5 months <br />. That 3
was on 7-5-74.
4 3-23-75. Operator error, high reactor 5
water level, shut down three days.
6 6-5-75. Failure of start-up transformer, 7
power source for cooling tower fans, shut down ten 8
days.
9 1975. Vibration problems in nuclear 10 reactor, shut down 23 days. 9.1 million cost passed 11 on to consumers. This is our cheap electricity.
12 11-12-75. Vermont Yankee given seven 13 months to begin building a gamma radiation shield to 14 protect people at elementary school across the street 15 from plant.
16 1-27-76. General Electric company, 17 manufacturer of reactor, indicates that the torus 18 could lurch upward under pressure, causing major 19 damage. The torus is a donut-shaped pool inside the 20 containment vessel. Shut down 18 days.
21 5-14-76. Lightning causes fire and 22 radiation releases.
23 I don't care how good the workers are in 24 the plants. May they stay alive and not become 25
111 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 angels. I don't care how good they are. They're 1
human stuff. It doesn't matter that we're on a world 2
that wobbles, lightning and earthquakes.
3 7-18-76. Plant releases 83,000 gallons of 4
water containing low levels of radioactive tritium 5
into Connecticut River. Yankee settles with state of 6
Vermont for $30,000.
7 Now it goes on. But I want to say that I 8
had a grandmother who was related to her sister, who 9
was once married to a governor of Vermont, and I came 10 up here as a child because there was no electricity 11 when we came up to the place that we came up to, and 12 I loved that, and I came back, and my grandmother, the 13 sister of one of the governor's old wives, she died in 14 childbirth, but she said when you come to a place, she 15 said, you take care of it and leave it a little better 16 than you found it.
17 When you come to visit a place, you leave 18 it a little better than you found it. And what she 19 said about her land in Vermont. She said this isn't 20 my land. This isn't our land. This is land that we 21 take care of while we have it. And we take care of it 22 and make it a little bit better than it was.
23 So I'd like to ask the NRC to take a 24 really close look, and I would like to reverse the 25
112 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 understanding. You asked us to help you. I'm asking 1
you to help us.
2 MR. CAMERON: Okay. Thank you, Cora. We 3
actually have two speakers and then I'm going to go to 4
Rani. And we have Beth Adams from Citizens Awareness 5
Network and then Jane Newton will be our final 6
speaker.
7 I think this is Beth coming down now, all 8
right, and then we'll go to Jane.
9 MS. ADAMS: Hi, there, how are you? I'm 10 a new resident of Greenfield, which is ten miles away 11 from Vermont Yankee. I came down in February, not 12 really knowing about Vermont Yankee. So I must say 13 that I'm not up to speed on all the details, and I 14 appreciate all the research that people that have 15 spoken before me have shared.
16 I've been an anti-nuclear activist, 17 however, since 1979, and at that time I opposed 18 nuclear power plants and I still any nuclear power 19 plant, and I do not believe that Vermont Yankee should 20 be open one more day.
21 We need to close Vermont Yankee, not just 22 think about extending licensing for 20 years. How 23 foolish is it to develop an energy that we don't know 24 what the waste, what we're going to do with the waste, 25
113 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're just going to let it sit there, and, in fact, 1
others that have spoken before me have shared that 2
this waste puts us in greater danger. Not only does 3
it put us in greater danger. Not one of you yet has 4
spoken about the people that have died already in 5
Kosovo, in Vieques, in Iraq, in Afghanistan, having 6
been poisoned by depleted uranium on the tips of the 7
missiles that were dropped there, either by protests, 8
as in Vieques, or so that we could, so that 9
corporations could control their profits.
10 It is time, as others have shared before 11 me, that we take a hard look at what we are doing.
12 Taking a different course now, I'd like to go in a 13 direction of what we can do, and others have shared 14 about this already as well.
15 We can, as Citizens Awareness Network well 16 knows, we can develop the technology at a reasonable 17 price, relatively much more reasonable price than 18 creating nuclear, keeping this plant alive, create 19 wind power, geothermal, which hasn't been mentioned.
20 Geothermal energy and hydro energy to create 21 sustainable energy resources.
22 I came from Maine. We closed Vermont 23 Yankee. They have a viable renewal energy plan in 24 Maine. They have a dam that actually has little 25
114 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 elevators that lift the fish uphill and people can buy 1
into energy produced by that type of energy.
2 Geothermal. There's a lot of hope in what that can 3
do.
4 We have a heated core from the center of 5
the Earth, that we're not utilizing, we're not 6
resourcing ourselves with that yet, except in areas 7
of--when I say "we" I'm thinking of this area. But 8
other areas of the world and other parts of the 9
country rely on geothermal energy for electricity and 10 fuel already.
11 So there are things that we can do and 12 that's what I think we should be focusing on, and it 13 should be a regional discussion since it affects 14 regional issues. Thank you.
15 MR. CAMERON: Okay. Thank you, Beth. Our 16 final speaker is Jane Newton.
17 MS. NEWTON: I really didn't plan to speak 18 at all but I sort a can't help it. I have no real 19 qualifications, except that I'm a really terrified 20 mother and grandmother, and I can tell, I can 21 recognize a corporate con, corporate lies, and what I 22 believe is a corporate crime against humanity, and for 23 the people who are trying to tell us that nuclear 24 energy is clean and it doesn't contribute to 25
115 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 greenhouse gases, are not taking into consideration 1
the amount of nonrenewable energy used to dig up and 2
process the uranium, to make it into a fissionable 3
form.
4 And as the person before me mentioned, the 5
side product of making uranium fissionable is what's 6
known as depleted uranium which is not depleted at 7
all, and it's providing free, it has been providing 8
free, since about 1990, the means for the U.S.
9 military to fight a secret ongoing nuclear war.
10 Therefore, nuclear energy is fueling war, which is 11 just one more way to destroy the world.
12 MR. CAMERON: Okay. Thank you, Jane, and 13 thank all of you for your comments today, and I'm just 14 going to have Rani Franovich close the meeting for us.
15 Rani.
16 MS. FRANOVICH: Thank you, Chip. I just 17 wanted to thank you all for coming again. I know a 18 lot of you don't necessarily feel that the NRC takes 19 your comments into consideration. I can assure you we 20 do. Not all of you may be happy with how we change or 21 incorporate the comments, depending on how they fit 22 into the process, but I can assure you that we will 23 respond to the comments that we receive at this 24 meeting and in writing.
25
116 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 So thanks again for coming. Those of you 1
who registered and met our attendants at the front 2
table out here, they have meeting feedback forms, that 3
we're hoping you will out, if you have any suggestions 4
for how we can improve the conduct of our public 5
meetings, things we can do better, how we may serve 6
you better. Please let us know. The forms are 7
addressed, pre-paid. All you have to do is fill them 8
out and mail them in, or you can deliver them to a 9
member of the staff.
10 And I just want to remind everyone that we 11 will be receiving comments, in writing, until June 12 23rd, as Rich Emch mentioned, and he is the point of 13 contact for receiving those comments.
14 Any comments received after that time, we 15 will do our best to consider, and again, thanks for 16 attending our meeting.
17 One other thing. The NRC staff will be 18 around here for a few minutes, if there are any 19 questions that people have, that we weren't able to 20 discuss with you during the meeting. Thank you.
21 (Off the record.)
22 23 24