ML090680558
| ML090680558 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 02/24/2009 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NRC-2682 | |
| Download: ML090680558 (53) | |
Text
Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Title:
Three Mile Island Unit 1 License Renewal Public Meeting - Afternoon Session Docket Number:
(n/a)
Location:
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Date:
Tuesday, February 24, 2009 Work Order No.:
NRC-2682 Pages 1-51 NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC.
Court Reporters and Transcribers 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 234-4433
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
+ + + + +
PRELIMINARY RESULTS THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION UNIT 1 LICENSE RENEWAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
+ + + + +
PUBLIC MEETING
+ + + + +
- TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 24TH, 2009
+ + + + +
The Public Meeting was held at 1:30 p.m.,
at the Sheraton Harrisburg Hershey Hotel, 4650 Lindle Road, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Bo Pham, Facilitator, presiding.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 2
APPEARANCES:
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 SARAH LOPAS STEPHEN KLEMENTOWICZ RON BELLAMY DIANE SCRENCI
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 3
A-G-E-N-D-A 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 WELCOME AND OPENING REMARKSError!
Bookmark not defined.
RESULTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWError!
Bookmark not defined.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SCHEDULE Error!
Bookmark not defined.
HOW TO SUBMIT COMMENTS.. Error! Bookmark not defined.
ORAL AND WRITTEN COMMENTS Error! Bookmark not defined.
Adjourn
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 4
1 2
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 5
P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1:30 p.m.
FACILITATOR PHAM: Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. My name is Bo Pham. I work for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission as the Branch Chief in the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulations.
And I will be the moderator/facilitator for the meeting today. The purpose of the meeting today -
- first of all, can everyone hear me okay? The purpose of the meeting today is to receive your comments on the recently issued Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for TMI.
The brief agenda is basically going to be Ms. Sarah Lopas giving a presentation about our findings, the Staff's findings in the Draft SEIS. And we'll open it from there on to receive your comments on the Draft SEIS.
We also have a number of staff available today to address questions, you know, after we've received all the comments. So we have Ms. Sarah Lopas, who is the Environmental Project Manager for the review of the application for TMI.
We have Mr. Ron Bellamy from the King of Prussia Office, who is the Branch Chief there. The resident inspectors working here who work on site at
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 6
the plant.
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Under him we have Mr. Stephen Klementowicz, who is a Senior Health Physicist at NRC headquarters.
We also have on site here Ms. Diane Screnci who is a public affairs officer at the King of Prussia office as well.
So, a few kind of housekeeping notes. With respect to making comments, if you haven't done so already, at some point please sign up with the sign-up sheet out there.
Also, there are yellow index cards out there for anyone who wishes to make comments. And I have a few extra here. If you were intending to make a comment and hadn't gotten the chance to sign up on one of these yellow index cards, raise your hand and I'll give you one.
Currently we have four people signed up. So there should be ample time for everyone. Also, we have as part of the receipt of the public comments today, we have a court reporter here in the back.
So, all the comments that are received today verbally will be recorded and be as part of the official transcript and official record for our meeting here today.
With that, I will start off with Ms. Sarah
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 7
Lopas and here and her presentation.
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. LOPAS: Hello. I'm Sarah, I'm the Environmental Project Manager for Three Mile Island Project. Thank you for coming out today. A brief overview of why we're
- here, some background information about NRC'S Environmental Review.
And then I'll go into our preliminary findings of our Environmental Review of the Three Mile Island License Renewal Application. I'll refer to Three Mile Island as TMI-1 for the rest of the presentation.
I'll then give you guys some information on how you can submit comments outside this meeting and what the rest of our review looks like. Next slide.
The Atomic Energy Act gives the Nuclear Regulatory Commission the authority to issue operating licenses to commercial nuclear power plants for a period of up to 40 years.
The Atomic Energy Act also allows the license renewal for up to an additional 20 years, depending on the outcome to determine whether a power plant can continue to operate safely and whether the protection of the environment can be assured during the 20 year license renewal term.
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1965, which I'll refer to as NEPA, established a
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 8
national policy for the impact of federal decision making on the human environment.
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 The Commission determined that reactor license renewal constitutes a federal action for which an environmental impact statement is warranted. I'll refer to environmental impact statement as EIS throughout the rest of the presentation.
In exercising its authority, the NRC's mission is three fold, to ensure adequate protection of the public health and safety, to promote common defense and security, and to protect the environment.
Next slide. The operating license for TMI-1 will expire in April of 2014. The NRC received AmerGen Energy Company's application for license renewal on January 8th, 2008.
As a side note, in January AmerGen Energy Company become Exelon Generation Company, LLC. As part of the NRC's review of Exelon's license renewal application, we performed an environmental review to determine the potential impacts of operating TMI-1 for an additional 20 years.
The Environmental Review is being conducted in accordance with NEPA. NEPA requires that federal agencies follow systematic approach in evaluating potential environmental impacts associated with
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 9
certain actions.
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 The NRC is required to consider the impacts of the proposed action and any mitigation for those impacts that would be considered to be significant.
Alternatives to the proposed action include taking no action on the Applicant's request are also to be considered.
I'll discuss further in a little bit, but the NRC Staff developed a generic environmental impact statement that addressed a number of issues that are common to all nuclear power plants.
The Staff is supplementing that generic EIS with a site-specific EIS that will also address issues that are specific to the TMI-1 site. The Staff also evaluates the conclusions reached in the generic EIS to determine if there's any new or significant information that would challenge those conclusions that we reached in the generic EIS.
NEPA is specifically structured to involve public participation
- and, accordingly, our Environmental Review includes opportunities for public involvement.
The first opportunity was at our scoping period last year. And we had the public scoping meeting back on May 1st in Middletown. This meeting on
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 10 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the Draft Supplemental EIS is the second opportunity for public participation.
The draft report has been published for comment. And we're here today to briefly discuss the results and receive your comments. In July 2009 we'll be issuing the final version of the supplemental EIS, which will address the comments that we received from the draft, including those that you'll provide to us today.
Next slide. In the mid 1990's the NRC developed a generic environmental impact statement by evaluating the impacts of all operating nuclear power plants across the U.S.
The NRC looked at 92 separate impact areas and found that for 69 of those areas the impacts were the same for all plants with similar features. The NRC called these category 1 issues or generic issues.
And we were able to make generic conclusions that all the impacts on the environment would be small.
The NRC was unable to make similar determinations for the remaining 23 site-specific issues.
- And, instead, we would prepare a
supplemental environmental impact statement for each plant to address these remaining 23 site-specific
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 11 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 issues, which we call category 2 issues.
Accordingly, the Staff is supplementing the generic EIS with the site-specific EIS that addresses issues that are specific to TMI-1. Together the generic EIS and the supplemental EIS will form the Staff's analysis of the environmental impacts of license renewal for TMI-1.
Also, during the review the NRC Staff looks for and evaluate any new and significant information that might call into question the conclusions we'd reached previously in the generic EIS.
The Staff also searches for new issues that were not addressed in the generic EIS. Next slide.
So, how do we quantify those impacts? The generic environmental impact statement defines three impact levels, small, moderate and large.
You can use fish in the Susquehanna river as an example to illustrate how we define these three terms. So, despite prevention measures, the operation of TMI-1 may affect the fish populations due to the intake structure.
If the decrease in fish is so small that it cannot be detected in relation to the total population of fish in the river, that impact would be small. If the losses of the fish cause the population to decline
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 12 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 but then stabilize at some lower level, this would be a moderate impact.
If the losses of fish population decline to the point where they cannot be stabilized or it continually declines, then this impact would be large.
We apply this methodology to each resource area we study, such as socioeconomics, air quality, etcetera.
Next slide. This is our decision standard for the environmental review. Simply put, is license renewal acceptable from an environmental standpoint?
To make this determination the NRC Staff uses information from various sources as we conduct an Environmental Review.
We use the information received in the environmental report that was submitted as part of the TMI-1 license renewal application. We also conducted an environmental audit in late April of last year where we toured the TMI-1 facility, observed plant systems and evaluated the interaction of the plant with the environment.
We talked to plant personnel and reviewed specific documentation. We also spoke with Federal, State and Local officials.
Additionally, we considered the comments received during the public scoping period.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 13 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 All this information formed the basis of our preliminary conclusions presented in the draft supplemental EIS. Next slide. This slide and the next slide list the 59 generic or category 1 environmental issues that were applicable to TMI-1 during the license renewal period.
We have a tough time focusing with this projector. It is in your slide handout if you got a copy of your slide handout. Maybe just refer to your handout for this slide.
Steve, you can move on to the next slide.
So here is the second slide. For these 59 generic issues NRC Staff did not find any information that would call in to question the conclusions that we reached in the generic EIS.
As such, we have preliminarily adopted the conclusions that impacts of category 1 issues are small. Next slide. Radiological impacts is a category 1 issue that I will discuss a little bit more in detail.
As a category 1 issue, the NRC made a generic determination based on information evaluated from all nuclear power plants operating in the U.S.
that the impact of radiological releases from normal powerplant operations during the period of extended
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 14 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 operations is small.
By
- design, the operation of nuclear powerplants is expected to result in small releases of radiological effluence.
TMI-1 is certainly no exception.
During our site audit we looked at selected parts of the radioactive effluent monitoring and radiological environmental monitoring programs and supporting documentation.
We looked at how the gaseous and liquid effluence are controlled, treated, monitored and released, as well as how solid radioactive wastes are handled, packaged and shipped.
We looked at how the Applicant's radiation protection program maintains radiological releases in compliance with the NRC's regulations. We also looked at the Applicant's radiological environmental monitoring data from an on-site and off-site monitoring stations.
This data includes the results of evaluations of water, milk, fish, food products and direct radiation. Based on our review of the data, we found that the calculated dose of the maximumly exposed member of the public to be well within the NRC's radiation protection limits.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 15 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 The dose of the maximumly exposed person is a conservative calculation, which assumes maximum values for activities such as breathing rate, food consumption, drinking water and proximity to the plant associated with an individual who is exposed to all radiation sources and to TMI-1.
Based on a
historical review of the radiological data and the current status of the plant's radiological systems, the NRC concluded that radiological releases from the plant are expected to be similar on a year-to-year basis during the period of extended operation.
During the NRC's review no new and significant information related to this issue was found. Thus, we have preliminarily concluded that TMI-1's radiological impact on human health and the environment is small.
This finding is consistent with what's in the NRC's generic EIS. Next slide. This slide you might want to look up in your handout as well. This slide lists the site-specific issues that we reviewed for continued operation of TMI-1 during the proposed license renewal period, including potential impacts expected during the steam generator replacement project at TMI-1.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 16 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I'll briefly discuss a few of the bigger issues. The first set of issues I'll discuss relate to TMI-1's use of groundwater and surface water. TMI-1 has seven on-site wells that withdraw groundwater for plant services and drinking water.
TMI-1 also withdraws surface water from the Susquehanna River for use as plant cooling water.
Plant surface and groundwater use is regulated by the Susquehanna River Basin Commission, which requires annual reporting of groundwater pumping rates and surface water withdrawals.
A review of groundwater pump tests indicated that TMI-1 groundwater withdrawals have no affect on nearby wells. Surface water withdrawals in the Susquehanna River are a small percentage of the river's flow, even during low flow conditions.
Furthermore, TMI-1 participates in the Cowanesque Lake Water Storage Project, which releases water to the Susquehanna during drought conditions.
NRC Staff determined that potential impacts from water use conflicts would be small during the license renewal period.
With regard to threatened and endangered species, during the license renewal term and during refurbishment, the Staff consulted the U.S. Fish and
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 17 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Wildlife Service Pennsylvania Field
- Office, the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission, the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources and the Pennsylvania Game Commission.
The Fish and Wildlife Service determined that no Federally listed, threatened or endangered species are known to occur in the vicinity of TMI-1 or its transmission corridors.
The Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources noted that, although several state listed species of concern may occur in the vicinity of TMI-1 and its transmission line corridors, the proposed action and associated refurbishment would not cause any adverse impacts to these species.
With regard to socioeconomics, because non-outage employment levels at TMI-1 remain relatively unchanged during the license renewal period, and because the length of time needed for the steam generator project is a relatively short duration, there would be no impacts or small impacts related to housing, education, transportation, and land use.
No impacts to known historic and archaeological resources are expected with continued operation of TMI-1 or during refurbishment because Exelon does not plan to modify the plant or any of its
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 18 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 structures.
Next slide. The next issue I'd like to discuss is cumulative impacts. These are impacts that are minor when considered individually, but could be significant when considered with other past, present or reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency or person undertakes the other actions.
The Staff considered cumulative impacts on water resources, aquatic resources, terrestrial resources, human health, and socioeconomics, including historic and archeological resources.
Some contributors to cumulative environment impacts include other power generating plants in the lower Susquehanna River
- Basin, including hydro-electric dams, gas well drilling in the river basin, past and present industrial discharge to the Susquehanna
- River, transmission line right-of-way maintenance and developed of rural land in the lower sub-basin.
Our preliminary determination is that any cumulative impacts resulting from the operation of TMI-1 during the license renewal period would be small, with the exception of aquatic resources, where cumulative impacts resulting from all past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions, including
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 19 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the non-TMI-1 actions, would be small to moderate.
The NRC Staff determined that no cumulative impacts to socioeconomics and historic resources during the license renewal period. Next slide. As part of the environmental review process we also evaluated a number of alternatives to license renewal.
Specifically we looked at the impacts of replacing the power generated by TMI-1 with power from other
- sources, or by energy efficiency and conservation measures.
In evaluating alternatives to license renewal, the NRC Staff screens available technologies to remove those that cannot meet future system needs or those whose costs and benefits don't justify inclusion in the range of reasonable alternatives.
For alternatives for TMI-1 license renewal the NRC Staff initially considered 17 discrete potential alternatives, including technology such as wind and solar power, wave energy, wood waste and then narrowed these lists down to four discrete alternatives and one combination alternative.
Alternatives the teem looked at included not renewing the TMI-1
- license, replacing TMI-1's generation with power from coal or natural gas plants, or purchasing power from electricity providers.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 20 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 We also evaluated a demand side of flash energy conservation or energy efficiency alternative.
Finally, the Staff analyzed the combination alternative that included portions of conservation energy efficiency, natural gas generation and a series of power uprates at existing hydro-electric dams on the Susquehanna River.
Next slide. For each alternative we looked at the same types of issues that we did when we were evaluating the environmental impacts of license renewal.
The NRC's preliminary conclusion is that the environmental impacts from not renewing the TMI-1 license, that is if the plant just shut down, could have moderate impacts in the area of socioeconomics.
Environmental impacts from likely power generation alternatives could reach moderate to large significance with regard to air quality, terrestrial and aquatic resources and land use.
We also -- for the combination alternative, environmental impacts would be small for most areas considered, with some moderate impacts. The energy conservation and efficiency alternative is the environmentally preferred alterative to license renewal.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 21 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next slide. During the environmental review we found no information that would challenge the conclusions contained in the generic EIS. Therefore, we preliminarily adopted the generic conclusions that the impacts associated with the 59 category 1 issues applicable to TMI-1 would be continue to be small during the proposed license renewal period.
In the draft supplemental environmental impact statement we analyzed the remaining site specific issues that were applicable to TMI-1 and determined that the environmental impacts resulting from these issues would also be small.
We also evaluated some potential likely alternatives to energy production to TMI-1 and determined that the environmentally preferred alternative overall is energy efficiency and conservation.
However, that finding doesn't make the option of renewing TMI-1 unreasonable. Therefore, based on these conclusions, the NRC'S preliminary recommendation is that the environmental impacts of license renewal for TMI-1 are not so great that license renewal would be unreasonable.
Next slide. This slide shows the important milestone dates for the environmental review process.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 22 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 The highlighted dates show our future milestone dates. The draft supplemental environmental impact statement was published on December 2nd, 2008.
And that's also known as supplement 37 for TMI-1. We're currently accepting public comments on the draft until March 4th, 2009. And that's next week.
So that's kind of soon.
But, originally this meeting was supposed to be back at the end of January. So that kind of explains the quick turn around. As Bo mentioned earlier today, today's meeting is being transcribed.
So, the comments that you bring here today, that you speak today will carry the same weight as any written comments that we receive. Once the comment period closes we'll develop the final environmental impact statement.
And we expect to publish that some time around mid July of 2009. Next slide. This slide identifies me as your primary point of contact for the environmental review.
Jay Robinson is the Safety Project Manager.
And the Safety Review is ongoing. Documents related to the TMI review may be found at the Londonderry Municipal Township Building, the Middletown Public Library and the Pennsylvania State Harrisburg Library.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 23 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 At the bottom of this slide is the internet address where you can find a PDF version of the TMI DSEIS. The EIS is also outside on the registration table.
We have plenty of copies, so please take as many as you'd like. In addition, if you filled out a registration card outside and you put your address on it, we will put you on the mailing list to get a copy of the final environmental impact statement, the one that's published in July.
Next slide. So, as I mentioned before, there's a few other ways you can provide comments, so you can give your comments here today. If you're not ready to do that today you can also send an email to ThreeMileIslandEIS@nrc.gov.
You can also send your comments by mail to the address up there. Or you can stop by at Rockville and visit and tell us what you think personally there.
But, once again, we have that comment deadline of March 4th, next Wednesday, I believe that is, to keep our schedule moving along.
And, with that, that's the conclusion of my presentation. I'll give it back to Bo and your comments. Thank you.
FACILITATOR PHAM: Thank you, Sarah. Like
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 24 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Sarah said, this is not the last opportunity or the only opportunity for you to make public comments or provide public comments.
And the March 4th time line is coming up soon. So, if you feel that you have any hardship giving your comments and stuff like that, please let us know about that.
And I always try to plug for the technology.
I think the email route is probably going to be the most efficient means of getting your comments in for the Staff as well.
Right now we're going to start opening the session to receive your comments regarding the draft environmental impact statements. Once again, we do have a court reporter here, he's in the back, that will record and transcribe all the statements you make today.
Please, I ask when you come up to make your statement to state your name again so that we'll get it right in the transcript. And, with that, we'll start with our --
MR. PORTZLINE: What are the ground rules?
FACILITATOR PHAM: I guess it depends. If you have general questions that I or Sarah may be able to respond to, that's fine. But if you have specific
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 25 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 questions about the analysis or the evaluations in the draft SEIS itself, I think we're probably not ready to make any responses.
That's the whole point of this meeting, to receive those comments and the Staff will respond to them as part of formulating the final SEIS.
MR. PORTZLINE: (Inaudible, no microphone.)
FACILITATOR PHAM: Your comments will be transcribed and --
MR. PORTZLINE: (Inaudible, no microphone.)
FACILITATOR PHAM: That's a good point. We can talk about it afterwards. But I think it's a procedural aspect.
MR. PORTZLINE: (Inaudible, no microphone.)
FACILITATOR PHAM: Let's wait -- as part of your comments, let's go ahead and make those your comments. The court reporter is not getting this information on record, basically. Are you signed up to speak, sir?
MR. PORTZLINE: (Inaudible, no microphone.)
No.
FACILITATOR PHAM: Well, if you're going to make a comment, let's go ahead and get you filled out.
Do you want these as comments for the record?
MR.
PORTZLINE:
Scott Portzline,
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 26 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Three Mile Island Alert.
And I just wanted to clarify to Sarah that on the place that you can view the documents, it didn't list the Pennsylvania Harrisburg
- Library, the State Library.
It did not. And I'm wondering if you are sending. Because that's the repository for this area designated. It mentioned Penn-State Harrisburg, that's different than the Harrisburg State Library, which is the official repository for Three Mile Island as designated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
MS. LOPAS: Sorry, I apologize.
FACILITATOR PHAM: Thank you, for that comment. We'll go ahead and start with Ms. Karen Walsh. She's from the Pennsylvania Energy Alliance.
And also, if you have copies of your written comments you'd like to provide to us for the Court Reporter as well, it would be easier for him to verify what you say. Go ahead and take the podium.
MS. WALSH: Hello, my name is Karen Walsh.
I'm the Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Energy Alliance. I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak here today in support of the re-licensing of Three Mile Island, Unit 1.
As the Executive Director of the
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 27 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Pennsylvania Energy Alliance, I speak for a group of independent community leaders and organizations representing environmental,
- business, scientific, labor and healthcare interests.
We have formed this coalition to support nuclear energy and to advocate for additional clean, safe and reliable sources of electricity generation in our commonwealth.
As you know, Pennsylvania is the Nation's second largest producer of nuclear energy. One third of our electricity comes from this carbon-free source.
Unfortunately, Pennsylvania also has the distinction of ranking fourth highest in the nation in carbon dioxide emissions, second highest in sulfur dioxide emissions, and fifth highest in nitrogen oxide emissions.
During the next ten years our electricity demand is expected to rise 1.5 percent a year. To meet our ever-increasing demand for electricity in a way that does not destroy our environment, we need a diverse energy mix that includes nuclear power, cleaner fossil fuels, renewable sources and energy efficiency.
However, conservation alone will not offset the expect growth in our electricity use and renewable
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 28 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 sources like wind and solar are unreliable. Nuclear energy is the only source that can reliably generate electricity around the clock for millions of consumers with no harmful greenhouse gas emissions.
Each year in the United States nuclear generated electricity avoids almost 700 million tons of carbon dioxide, three million tons of sulfur dioxide and one million tons of nitrogen oxide.
TMI-1 serves as just one example of how nuclear power can provide a reliable source of electricity that does not contribute to global warming.
By operating nuclear power instead of coal, the area around TMI-1 avoids 271 tons of carbon dioxide per hour. Avoiding 271 tons of carbon dioxide per hour is the equivalent of taking 29 SUVs or pickup trucks off the road for an entire year.
Furthermore, years of environmental monitoring has produced no evidence that TMI's Unit 1 operation negatively impacts Middletown and the surrounding communities.
TMI officials annually perform 1,700 analyses on roughly 1,300 environmental samples from air, water, fish, cow's milk, soil and food products.
In recent years TMI has teamed up with two state
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 29 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
- agencies, the Pennsylvania Bureau of Radiation Protection and the Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency, to install a computer connection that provides both agencies with real-time radiation readings from in-plant monitors.
It's not surprising that a recent poll conducted by Terry Madonna Opinion Research found that nearly three quarters of the people who live near TMI Unit 1 have a favorable opinion of the facility.
Knowing TMI's history of responsible environmental monitoring, the Pennsylvania Energy Alliance is pleased to know that the NRC's analyses have produced similar findings that TMI Unit 1 does not negatively impact the environment.
This independent confirmation reaffirms our belief in TMI Unit 1 and its goal of providing a clean, safe and reliable source of electricity for over 800,000 homes in central Pennsylvania. Thank you.
FACILITATOR PHAM: Thank you, Karen. Next we have Ms. Diane Little. Also, once again, please remember to state your name. And also, I have more yellow cards if anybody wants to sign up to speak.
Raise your hand and let me know.
MS. LITTLE: Hi, my name is Diane Little. I
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 30 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 live in Lower Paxton Township. I'm not necessarily opposed to the re-licensing of the power station, because common sense dictates that we do need the energy.
But common sense also dictates that we are a little bit more prudent in one area that I have done some research on. It involves the -- I don't really want to use this. I'm really loud. You can hear me without this.
FACILITATOR PHAM: We need it for the Court Reporter.
MS. LITTLE: Okay. I just wanted it down maybe a hair. Okay. This is with regard to the design-basis accidents potential. Basically, what the containment structure can withstand the impact of, how it is protected.
And I just ask that, as part of the re-licensing, the NRC requires additional measures to strengthen the security from potential accidents or terrorist attacks with regard to aircraft.
I believe that all nuclear powerplants should have additional protection from aircraft. But, TMI is unique in that it is so close to the Harrisburg International Airport.
And, any that has ever gone there, it's like
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 31 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 how is this planned? I don't get it. Anyway, according to the report, this is touched on briefly in the supplemental draft.
It says, the Commission has determined that the environmental impact of DBA's, which is design-basis accidents, are of small significance for all plants because the plants are designed to successfully withstand these accidents.
However, if we go back to that old book that some of you have, remember this old book, on page 292, because I happened to read it, it says, and I have a copy of this.
And this was put out through the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 1980. And it says, give me a minute here. I'll just read it right from the book, then you know I'm not making it up. How's that?
It says, page 292, volume 2, part 1, Three Mile Island, a report to the Commissioners and to the public. And this is a special inquiry group of the NRC.
The evidence is that the TMI-2 facility is not capable of withstanding the impact of an aircraft weighing in excess of 200,000 pounds. Okay. It says it right there.
And then it says, the containment structure
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 32 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 and other structures designed to withstand certain aircraft impact events are of an adequate strength to withstand the impact of airplanes which can reasonably be expected to frequent Harrisburg International Airport.
Now, I did go down to the airport. And I did do some research. We all know that the airport, it's really not thriving. It's not doing a booming business.
But, if you were to take -- let's just use common sense here. But if you were just to take, they said they have 195 operations per day. I think that's high. But that's what's on their website.
If you were jut to count the jet airplanes, and they have military aircraft. But, if they have 71,000 operations per year and say 13 percent of them are jet airplanes, that's about -- just bear with me -
- that's like 9,000.
Well, originally in this report -- this is what gets me -- they calculate risk factors. You know you have to have risk factors. And the risk factor for the accident that did occur was a billion to one, they say.
But it did occur. Anyway, the NRC -- and I say this respectfully, because, like I said, I'm not
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 33 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 necessarily opposed to nuclear power, it says, at this time the Staff concluded that about 2,400 operations per year represented no undue risk to the health or to the safety of the public.
Okay. It says farther down, if it were to increase -- now 200,000 pounds is not a lot. The 747 is about 700,000 pounds. And they don't have them there much anymore.
I don't know if they do at all. This is from talking to someone. Although, it does say on their website they do have a large aircraft, it says.
Okay.
Conservatism in the crash probability analysis are consistent with the Staff's judgment that a significant increase in the frequency of operations is needed to justify a re-evaluation of the risk to the public of larger than design-basis aircraft --
that's aircraft over 200,000 pounds.
Corrective measures, such as restrictions of air space in the site of the vicinity or hardening of plant structures could potentially be undertaken.
Alternatively, plant shutdown may be required if the crash probability becomes unacceptably high or large.
Now, what do we have? We have a unique situation with 3 Mile Island Nuclear Station. The
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 34 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 airport was well before nuclear power plant. And I'm not opposed to re-licensing if more prudent measures are taken.
Let's just use common sense. Probably a lot of you are thinking, it's a good idea to have a little bit more protection from aircraft, but it's kind of like doubling that emphasis if you have a nuclear powerplant that's so close to an airport.
And I know this hasn't been touched on much in the report. I did read the supplemental. But, anyway, just one last point, there's a Congressional Research Service Report that was written August 8th, 2007.
And this is Congressional Research Service, the Library of Commerce, prepared for members and committee of Congress. Anyway, and I'll give this report.
It says the DPT, which is the design-basis threat final rule excluded aircraft attacks, which raise considerable controversy. In approving the rule NRC rejected a petition from the Union of Concerned Scientist to require that nuclear plants be surrounded by aircraft barriers made of beams and cables. It's called the bedge hedge concept.
And critics of the rules charge that
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 35 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 deliberate aircraft crashes were a highly plausible mode of attack. Anyway, basically what I see and I have read a majority of the report, the risk is "small." And small is pretty relative.
I really think that what was written in 1980 is a promise. And I think that it should be investigates because TMI does have a unique threat.
And the new nuclear power plants are putting more safety measures into the design with the extra steel inside the containment structure.
I can't think of the one particular power plant -- do I have to stop?
FACILITATOR PHAM: No, can I just ask you to summarize it. We do have other speakers.
MS. LITTLE: I'm done. I didn't know I was talking so long.
FACILITATOR PHAM: I didn't mean to cut you off like that.
MS. LITTLE: Here'S my closing. My closing is, okay, since there's going to be a lot of remodeling and construction at the TMI Nuclear Station I think it would be a good time, it would make sense to also consider doing some construction to improve security with regard to aircraft impact. Thank you.
FACILITATOR PHAM: Thank you, Diane. Also,
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 36 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 could I also to borrow those reports from you so we can give the full citation for the Court Reporter?
Since it happened twice, if you have cell phones on please make sure you silence it.
Sorry, I didn't mean to call anyone out specifically. And also, once again, if you still want to make comments, you didn't get it before and you need a yellow card to fill out, just raise your hand and let me know.
We'll get you signed up here. Next we have Joyce Scott from HDCCW.
MS. SCOTT: Hello, I'm Joyce Scott from the HDCCW, which stands for the Harrisburg Diocese and Council of Catholic Women. On behalf of the Diocese and Council, I am representing our Commission Chair Linda Brash, who has had surgery and could not be here today.
The Harrisburg Diocese and Council is made up of nine districts. And we cover Conewago, which is Adams County, Cumberland Perry, the Dauphin County, Lancaster, Lebanon, North Umberland, Sections of Franklin and York.
So we're pretty wide-spread. This all came about because at the national level there's been a program in existence which I was a committee member of
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 37 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 eight or nine years ago.
And it's called CASE, and that's Children for A Safe Environment. And there's always been a concern for our children to live in a
safe environment.
We got the opportunity -- I'm an immediate past president of the council. We got the opportunity two years ago to write a resolution. And, as I mentioned, Linda Brasch, one of her concerns, because she lives in Middletown, has been TMI.
And we decided that we would write this resolution, which we are in the process of submitting to National. And it does concern nuclear safety and children's environment.
I'd like to share with you right now a few comment that Linda has sent to me. And this may clear up some of the reasons I'm here today. Linda wrote, the promotion of nuclear energy, solar, wind and other technologies is what's needed to become energy independent.
So we do recognize that. Create jobs and stabilize our economy, especially at this time. But we are seeking truth and justice and a safe, secure energy for the future, upholding our human dignity, respect for life and the integrity of our environment.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 38 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 And basically, that's what we are all about.
We feel before licensing is considered or implemented that there is a need for the Yucca Mountain site to be established and operating as a permanent repository for spent nuclear fuel before all of this takes place.
In addition, for the common good and our environment, establish a law to deny a license to a nuclear site that has had an accident with uncontrolled releases of radiation.
We can secure for our children the truth and justice of a safe, secure energy future. We do feel this is possible. Your response is gratefully appreciated. And I thank you.
FACILITATOR PHAM: Thank you, Joyce. Next we have Andrew Dehoff from the Susquehanna River Basin Commission.
MR. DEHOFF: Thank you. My name is Andrew Dehoff. I'm the Director of Planning and Operations at the Susquehanna River Basin Commission. First off, in looking through the draft EIS, it seems that NRC has addressed most of the concerns that SRBC raised in the scoping process.
And we're thankful for that. However, I do have a few comments. We'll start with two minor comments about specific points in the EIS. First,
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 39 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 some information that SRBC supplied regarding an invasive species, Zebra Mussels, indicated that they were only present in the headwaters of New York and the Great Bend portion of the Susquehanna River and Pennsylvania.
Unfortunately, later in 2008 they were discovered at the Conowingo Dam in Maryland. So we can provide some updated information to you regarding that.
Second, the storage volumes that were cited as needed to mitigate for TMI's consumptive use during a drought were unfamiliar to us. We're not sure what the source of those were. And we'd just like the opportunity to discuss them with Exelon or NRC, where they came from.
Finally, a general comment. As you might guess, SRBC's main concern is related to withdrawals of water from the river. And, I'd like to comment on NRC's finding in Section 3.1 and Table 411 that conclude that the refurbishment and continued operations of the plant pose a small impact to the surface waters of the basin.
The conclusion seems to be predicated on Exelon's compliance with SRBC's regulatory programs.
While we appreciate NRC's confidence in our programs,
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 40 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 we do hope that you'll remain involved in matters related to the potential impacts to the resources of the river, particularly as they relate to the upgrades and continued operations and cumulative impacts.
I am pleased to report that Exelon has recently submitted an application to SRBC for plant modifications related to replacement of the steam generators and also submitted information related to continued use of onsite wells.
Exelon also indicated their intent to submit all appropriate applications for groundwater withdrawal, surface water withdrawal and consumptive water use by March 13th, at which time SRBC staff can begin its technical review.
In summary, we anticipate full cooperation from Exelon regarding those applications. And we look forward to continued coordination with NRC Staff.
Thank you.
FACILITATOR PHAM: Thank you, Andrew. The next person we have is Scott Portzline from TMI Alert.
I believe he's standing just outside the door. He's to give an interview here. We'll see if we can get him in here soon.
Is anyone out there who would like to make a comment? Because Scott is the last person. Anyone?
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 41 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Does anyone have any general questions?
MS. ANGELIC: My name is Holly Angelic. I'm a resident of Middletown. But I'm wondering if there are any opportunities to other communities that are equally affected, like Goldsborough on the other side of the river, to also offer public comments.
Or do they have to come all the way here?
It concerns me in terms of public participation and public comments. It seems that they are left out of this process or have been for this long. That's one of my questions.
FACILITATOR PHAM: Well, first of all, like I said, this is not the only opportunity for comment, and not the only medium to provide comments as well.
Sarah, could you let us know, you know, how did you get the word out about the comments?
MS. LOPAS: Right. Preliminary we got the word out through putting ads in newspapers. There are newspaper ads. I believe we advertised in three newspapers.
This time around we advertised in the general Harrisburg Newspaper, the York Daily Record, and perhaps one other, Lancaster. But it was three papers that kind of serve this general area.
But, you know, as far as -- that's the
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 42 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 primary way that we get it out. There seems to be pretty decent media coverage. I've found, you know, I'm on an email alert where I get Googled or whenever TMI pops up in a newspaper ad.
And it seems that all those papers have pretty good coverage. As far as the location of the meeting, is that also kind of a concern for you?
MS. ANGELIC: Just that everybody gets a chance to participate, the people of Goldsborough and the west shore are getting the public announcements, that's one of my questions.
MS. LOPAS: Right.
MS. ANGELIC: I have a couple more too if we're just waiting for Scott. My quick question then before Scott comes back is, in a scoping meeting that I went to there was a lot of discussion about Unit 2.
And, even though the NRC doesn't have to include Unit 2 in their environmental impact assessment, I'm wondering if they have done anything and to sort of follow up on the issue of the aircraft, the structure that's housing all that radioactivity, if the NRC has looked at that at all, even though they haven't had to.
FACILITATOR PHAM: I don't know if you have a quick response to that one. But we can gather the
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 43 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Staff afterwards to see if anybody can address those particular issues.
MS. LOPAS: Quick response would be that we do address it briefly as far as impacts in our radiological impact section. You know, we talk about in our cumulative health impact section, at the end of Chapter 4.
You know, we discuss TMI-2 and what's happening there right now, as well as Peach Bottom, you know, which isn't far away. And the other plant scenario contributes a cumulative radiological impact.
Steve, do you have anything else to add?
FACILITATOR PHAM: Let's go ahead and let Scott make his comment. Once again, the Staff will be available right after the meeting to respond to you as well. This is Scott Portzline from TMI Alert.
MR. PORTZLINE: Sarah, you gave me -- yes, I'll have to take a few minutes. I have some questions. When there was a recent earthquake that didn't register at Three Mile Island, has that problem been resolved with the sensitivity of the monitoring?
It's part of the environmental impact. Is there anyone that would like to answer that question?
Is there a reason we have this meeting?
FACILITATOR PHAM: Yes, the purpose of the
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 44 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 meeting today is to receive your comments. So, if you have a comment, by all means.
MR. PORTZLINE: Yes. The only difference between this type of meeting here in the United States and in East Germany, they wouldn't even allow you to have a comment.
But what good does it do you to give a comment or have concerns or public participation if we don't get answers? So, the whole setup is ridiculous.
We don't get answers to our questions.
With the security issue that I brought up at the earlier meetings, I showed how there would be an environmental impact if they implemented security to deny intruders entrance to the bridges, access to the bridges or boats to go underneath that.
Was that examined in your environmental impact analysis? Sarah is saying no. She's not at a microphone. No, that's out of scope. Again, what good does it do to raise an issue?
I didn't even ask a question. But I gave a comment and it wasn't even examined. The NRC has no problem with breaking its own rules. We filed a petition for rule making to have entrance guards, site protection officers at the entrances of nuclear plants.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 45 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 For seven years they sat on that decision and broke their own guidelines on more than 40 occasions. So, if I'm sitting here at a meeting and I interrupt or maybe seem a little bit out of line, I'm still 37 times shy of the 40 plus times the NRC hasn't followed their rules and guidelines.
Victor Gilinsky, former NRC Chairman, says that the public is virtually shut out of this process and that the NRC has been very effective at public input being squashed.
That's exactly what's happening. It's really a waste of time to be here. But I still need to say what I think is right. I think another problem, Sarah, that should come up with the water issue is you concluded that the impact would be small.
But, you know, the weather is changing. We have more frequency of droughts and more frequency of floods. In particular with droughts, the impact could become at least moderate and possibly severe. Was that examined in the environmental impact? Can you respond on the record, please?
FACILITATOR PHAM: Can you respond, Sarah?
MS. LOPAS: Briefly. I'll just say real quickly that that's what the Cowanesque Water Storage Project looks to alleviate, is droughts. That's the
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 46 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 short answer.
MR. PORTZLINE: So, in other words, they have an optimistic plan, an overly optimistic plan to release more water. Of course, if there's a drought, where'd you get it?
Let's see. I'd like to know how long the steam generators that are radioactive will be sitting in the parking lot at Three Mile Island and be monitored before they are taken away from the plant.
Is there someone who can answer that question? I'd like to have it on the record, would that be all right.
FACILITATOR PHAM: The point is to receive your comments regarding the Environmental Impact Statement.
MR. PORTZLINE: But you do have a court appointed transcription service.
So these are official documents and records. Yet you don't want to have an official statement on those.
FACILITATOR PHAM: Your statement will be official. This is not a -- the intent of the meeting today isn't to set up a debate between --
MR. PORTZLINE: I understand that.
FACILITATOR PHAM: If you disagree with the DSEIS, please state so. And we'll definitely consider
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 47 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 those.
MR. PORTZLINE: I've stated it enough times.
We just keep bumping our heads on that same problem.
I guess the last thing I'll do then, because this is largely just an exercise in suppression, suppression of
- actual, valuable, public exchange with our government.
Could you please turn on the computer? The little presentation is pretty much one of the portions of the same thing I presented a year ago. The most annoying problem to me with the environmental impact analysis is that the long-term waste storage, the financial considerations of that are not part of this rule or process.
So here we have a environmental impact analysis that excludes the largest issue of them all.
And I don't know if we can play that video or not.
You'll probably have to put a microphone next to the speaker.
If Matt could put a microphone near the speaker that might do it. If it doesn't, we'll compensate or just stop. Okay. If it's not playable you'll be able to view it at the back.
But what it talks about is that the environmental impact analysis excluding the financial
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 48 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 considerations of waste is a folly, one of mankind's greatest follies.
Because the payment schedule will go on forever. And if you drew a one inch line on a sheet of paper and let that equal one year, keep drawing that line until you're 72,000 miles in space.
And that's your payment schedule. How can that be fiscally responsible to pay for nuclear waste forever? We benefitted from nuclear waste for 50 years.
But we're going to pay for it longer --
well, the sun will engulf the earth before you've made your last payment. I don't care if we need nuclear energy or not.
Fiscally it's a failure. Okay. I guess that's it. If you want to see the video, you can see it in the back. It will be online at TMIA.com pretty soon too.
FACILITATOR PHAM: Well, thank you Scott.
Before we close out here, Ron Bellamy -- does anyone else have any general questions?
(No response.)
FACILITATOR PHAM: We have Mr. Ron Bellamy from the King of Prussia Office to make some final statements.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 49 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. BELLAMY: I guess I'd like to just put some of the things that have been discussed today may be in a little bit of perspective. Ms. Little, I find your comments very interesting because I wrote that report.
I was on the Rogavin Committee Report. And, if you go through that, you'll find a number of sections that I fortunately-unfortunately have to take credit for.
One of the things that I'd like to make sure that you understand is that the containment structure is just one barrier between the environment and the nuclear fuel.
So, if you lose the containment structure, that does not necessarily mean there's going to be any release of radioactive material. You then still have the reactor vessel, and then you still have the reactor fuel itself.
So, there are a number of barriers that will protect you and the environment, even if there is a catastrophic failure of the containment structure. So I just wanted to make sure that you realize that.
And that's the reasoning behind the aircraft design. Even if you lose that containment structure, there are other systems in place that will
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 50 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 automatically shut down the reactor and protect you and the environment.
So, if they want to talk more about that, I'll be glad to. Scott, the earthquake issue we did look at. There are seismic monitors at 3 Mile Island.
Those monitors are set appropriately for the earthquakes in this area.
And the earthquakes that occurred back in December were of such minimal magnitude that they did not activate the seismic monitors either at 3 Mile Island or at Peach Bottom.
PARTICIPANT: (Inaudible, no microphone.)
MR. BELLAMY: Yes there was, and there was communication from the plant to us.
PARTICIPANT: (Inaudible, no microphone.)
MR. BELLAMY: It was not within minutes because the plant did not get any signal. The plant got an offsite notification as I recall. And you brought up terrorist actions and potential boats under the river.
Issues like that are part of our routine inspection program. We look at that on a day-to-day basis. Am I going to get in trouble if I talk about force-on-force?
There are force-on-force exercises where
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 51 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 there are actual attempts to access the plant with experts that are designed in this area. So, the terrorist activities are certainly something that's on the top of our mind.
And we look at that on our routine day-to-day activities. I think Steve can talk a little bit about the steam generators. And I find your comments interesting about Commissioner Gilinsky.
Commissioner Gilinsky was not a chairman, he was one of our commissioners. And I actually had the opportunity to work for him for a small amount of time.
And his comments on public participation are well known. And it really didn't have anything specific to do with license renewal or the activities that we're here for today.
- But, you're
- correct, those were Mr.
Gilinsky's thoughts.
FACILITATOR PHAM: Thank you, Ron. Steve will be available after the meeting as well to speak to you.
MR.
PORTZLINE:
(Inaudible, not at microphone.)
FACILITATOR PHAM: Steve Klementowicz is a Senior Health Physicist at the NRC. I just wanted to
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 52 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 reiterate again this is not the only opportunity to provide comments for the draft environmental impact statement.
The Staff does consider all the comments that are provided.
In some cases we might respectfully disagree on your position or the comments made.
Nevertheless, we do consider all the comments. And we'll respond to them as part of formulating the final environmental impact statement.
So, with that, I would like to close out the meeting today.
There are meeting feedback forms out by the desk there where you sign in. And if you didn't sign in, please consider signing in so that we have a record of attendees here today. So, with that, thank you.
(Whereupon, at 2:36 p.m. the above-entitled matter was concluded.)