ML091200017

Issuance of Environmental Scoping Summary Report Associated with the Staff'S Review of the Application by the Nebraska Public Power District, for Renewal of the Operating License for Cooper Nuclear Station Unit 1

ML091200017
Person / Time
Site:	Cooper
Issue date:	05/29/2009
From:	David Pelton License Renewal Projects Branch 1
To:	Minahan S Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD)
Sayoc, Manny, NRR/DLR/RLRB 415-1924
References
TAC MD9737
Download: ML091200017 (42)

Text

May 29, 2009 Mr. Stewart B. Minahan Chief Nuclear Officer, Vice President - Nuclear Cooper Nuclear Station Nebraska Public Power District 72676 648A Avenue Brownville, NE 68321

SUBJECT:

ISSUANCE OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING

SUMMARY

REPORT ASSOCIATED WITH THE STAFFS REVIEW OF THE APPLICATION BY THE NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT FOR RENEWAL OF THE OPERATING LICENSE FOR COOPER NUCLEAR STATION UNIT 1 (TAC NO.

MD9737)

Dear Mr. Minahan:

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the staff) conducted a scoping process, from January 27, 2009 through March 27, 2009, to determine the scope of the staffs environmental review of the application for renewal of the operating license for the Cooper Nuclear Station Unit 1 (CNS-1). As part of the scoping process, the staff held two public environmental scoping meetings in Brownville, Nebraska, and Auburn, Nebraska on February 25, 2009, to solicit public input regarding the scope of the review. The scoping process is the first step in the development of a plant-specific supplement to NUREG-1437, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants (GEIS), for CNS-1.

At the conclusion of the scoping process, the staff prepared the enclosed environmental scoping summary report identifying comments received during the scoping period. This consists of comments received at the February 25, 2009, license renewal environmental scoping meetings, by letter and by electronic mail. In accordance with 10 CFR 51.29(b), all participants of the scoping process will be provided with a copy of the scoping summary report. The transcripts of the scoping meetings are publicly available at the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, or from the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS).

The ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room is accessible at http://adamswebsearch.nrc.gov/dologin.htm. The transcripts for the afternoon and evening meetings are listed under Accession Nos. ML090840062 and ML090840063, respectively.

Persons who do not have access to ADAMS, or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRCs PDR reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail at pdr.resource@nrc.gov.

The next step in the environmental review process is the issuance of a draft supplement to the GEIS scheduled for December 2009. Notice of the availability of the draft supplement to the GEIS and the procedures for providing comments will be published in an upcoming Federal Register notice.

S. Minahan If you have any questions concerning the staff review of this license renewal application, please contact Emmanuel Sayoc at 301-415-2989 or by e-mail at emmanuel.sayoc@nrc.gov, or Tam Tran at 301-415-3617 or by e-mail at tam.tran@nrc.gov.

Sincerely,

/RA/ Jay Robinson for David L. Pelton, Chief Projects Branch 1 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-298

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/encl: see next page

ML091200017 OFFICE LA:DLR PM:DLR:RPB2 PM:DLR:RPB1 BC:DLR:RPB1 DPelton NAME IKing ESayoc TTran (JRobinson for)

DATE 05/13/09 05/14/09 05/29/09 05/29/09 Letter to S. Minahan from D. Pelton May 29, 2009 DISTRIBUTION:

SUBJECT:

ISSUANCE OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING

SUMMARY

REPORT ASSOCIATED WITH THE STAFFS REVIEW OF THE APPLICATION BY THE NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT, FOR RENEWAL OF THE OPERATING LICENSE FOR COOPER NUCLEAR STATION UNIT 1 (TAC NOS.

MD9763 AND MD9737)

HARD COPY DLR RF E-MAIL:

PUBLIC RidsNrrDlrResource RidsNrrDlrRpb1 Resource RidsNrrDlrRpb2 Resource RidsNrrDlrRer1 Resource RidsNrrDlrRer2 Resource RidsNrrDlrRerb Resource RidsNrrDlrRpob Resource RidsNrrDciCvib Resource RidsNrrDciCpnb Resource RidsNrrDciCsgb Resource RidsNrrDraAfpb Resource RidsNrrDraApla Resource RidsNrrDeEmcb Resource RidsNrrDeEeeb Resource RidsNrrDssSrxb Resource RidsNrrDssSbpb Resource RidsNrrDssScvb Resource RidsOgcMailCenter Resource T. Tran E. Sayoc F. Lyon D. Roth (OGC)

A. Jones (OGC)

N. Taylor (RIV)

E. Collins (RIV)

C. Casto (RIV)

B. Maier (RIV)

V. Dricks (RIV)

D. Chamberlain (RIV)

A. Vegel (RIV)

W. Walker (RIV)

G. Miller (RIV)

G. Pick (RIV)

S. Burnell (RIV)

Cooper Nuclear Station cc:

Mr. Ronald D. Asche Mr. H. Floyd Gilzow President and Chief Executive Officer Deputy Director for Policy Nebraska Public Power District Missouri Department of Natural Resources 1414 15th Street P.O. Box 176 Columbus, NE 68601 Jefferson City, MO 65102-0176 Mr. Gene Mace Senior Resident Inspector Nuclear Asset Manager U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nebraska Public Power District P.O. Box 218 P.O. Box 98 Brownville, NE 68321 Brownville, NE 68321 Regional Administrator, Region IV Mr. John C. McClure U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Vice President and General Counsel 612 E. Lamar Blvd., Suite 400 Nebraska Public Power District Arlington, TX 76011-4125 P.O. Box 499 Columbus, NE 68602-0499 Director, Missouri State Emergency Management Agency Mr. David Van Der Kamp P.O. Box 116 Licensing Manager Jefferson City, MO 65102-0116 Nebraska Public Power District P.O. Box 98 Chief, Radiation and Asbestos Brownville, NE 68321 Control Section Kansas Department of Health Mr. Michael J. Linder, Director and Environment Nebraska Department of Environmental Bureau of Air and Radiation Quality 1000 SW Jackson P.O. Box 98922 Suite 310 Lincoln, NE 68509-8922 Topeka, KS 66612-1366 Chairman Ms. Melanie Rasmussen Nemaha County Board of Commissioners Radiation Control Program Director Nemaha County Courthouse Bureau of Radiological Health 1824 N Street Iowa Department of Public Health Auburn, NE 68305 Lucas State Office Building, 5th Floor 321 East 12th Street Ms. Julie Schmitt, Manager Des Moines, IA 50319 Radiation Control Program Nebraska Health & Human Services R&L Mr. Keith G. Henke, Planner Public Health Assurance Division of Community and Public Health 301 Centennial Mall, South Office of Emergency Coordination P.O. Box 95007 930 Wildwood Lincoln, NE 68509-5007 P.O. Box 570 Jefferson City, MO 65102

Cooper Nuclear Station cc:

Mr. Art Zaremba, Director of Nuclear Bill Victor Safety Assurance License Renewal Project Licensing Lead Nebraska Public Power District Cooper Nuclear Station P.O. Box 98 72676 - 648A Avenue Brownville, NE 68321 Brownville, NE 68321 Mr. John F. McCann, Director Jim Loynes Licensing, Entergy Nuclear Northeast License Renewal Project Engineer Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. Cooper Nuclear Station 440 Hamilton Avenue 72676 - 648A Avenue White Plains, NY 10601-1813 Brownville, NE 68321 Mike Boyce Garry Young Cooper Strategic Initiatives Manager License Renewal Manager Cooper Nuclear Station Entergy Nuclear 72676 - 648A Avenue 1448 S.R. 333, N-GSB-45 Brownville, NE 68321 Russellville, AK 72802 Dave Bremer Alan Cox License Renewal Project Manager License Renewal Technical Manager Cooper Nuclear Station Entergy Nuclear 72676 - 648A Avenue 1448 S.R. 333, N-GSB-45 Brownville, NE 68321 Russellville, AK 72802 Dave Lach LRP Entergy Project Manager Entergy Nuclear 1448 S.R. 333, N-GSB-45 Russellville, AK 72802

Environmental Impact Statement Scoping Process Summary Report Cooper Nuclear Station Unit 1 Brownville, Nebraska April 2009 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Rockville, Maryland ENCLOSURE

Introduction On September 30, 2009, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) received an application from the Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) dated August 28, 2007, for renewal of the operating license for the Cooper Nuclear Station Unit 1 (CNS-1). The CNS-1 is located in Brownville, NE. As part of the application, NPPD submitted an environmental report (ER) prepared in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 51. 10 CFR Part 51 contains the NRC requirements for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 and the implementing regulations promulgated by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ).

Section 51.53 outlines requirements for preparation and submittal of ERs to the NRC.

Section 51.53(c)(3) was based upon the findings documented in NUREG-1437, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants (GEIS). The GEIS, in which the staff identified and evaluated the environmental impacts associated with license renewal, was first issued as a draft for public comment. The staff received input from Federal and State agencies, public organizations, and private citizens before developing the final document. As a result of the assessments in the GEIS, a number of impacts were determined to be small and to be generic to all nuclear power plants. These were designated as Category 1 impacts. An applicant for license renewal may adopt the conclusions contained in the GEIS for Category 1 impacts, absent new and significant information that may cause the conclusions to fall outside those of the GEIS. Category 2 impacts are those impacts that have been determined to be plant-specific and are required to be evaluated in the applicants ER.

The Commission determined that the NRC does not have a role in energy planning decision-making for existing plants, which should be left to State regulators and utility officials.

Therefore, an applicant for license renewal need not provide an analysis of the need for power, or the economic costs and economic benefits of the proposed action. Additionally, the Commission determined that the ER need not discuss any aspect of storage of spent fuel for the facility that is within the scope of the generic determination in 10 CFR 51.23(a) and in accordance with 10 CFR 51.23(b). This determination was based on the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and the Commissions Waste Confidence Rule, 10 CFR 51.23.

On January 26, 2009, the NRC published a notice of intent in the Federal Register (74 FR 4476), to notify the public of the staffs intent to prepare a plant-specific supplement to the GEIS regarding the renewal application for the CNS-1 operating license. The plant-specific supplement to the GEIS will be prepared in accordance with NEPA, CEQ guidelines, and 10 CFR Part 51. As outlined by NEPA, the NRC initiated the scoping process with the issuance of the Federal Register Notice. The NRC invited the applicant, Federal, State, and local government agencies, local organizations, and individuals to participate in the scoping process by providing oral comments at the scheduled public meetings and/or submitting written suggestions and comments before the end of the scoping period on March 27, 2009. The scoping process included two public scoping meetings, which were held, on February 25, 2009, at the Brownville Concert Hall, 126 Atlantic St., Brownville, NE 68321, and the Auburn Senior Center, 1101 J St., Auburn, NE 68305. The NRC issued press releases, and distributed flyers locally. Approximately 110 people attended the meetings. Both sessions began with NRC staff members providing a brief overview of the license renewal process and the NEPA process. Following the NRCs prepared statements, the meetings were open for public comments. Twelve (12) attendees provided either oral comments or written statements

that were recorded and transcribed by a certified court reporter. The transcripts of the meetings can be found as an attachment to the meeting summary, which was issued on April 15, 2009.

The meeting summary is available for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, or from the NRCs Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). The ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room is accessible at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/web-based.html. The accession number for the meeting summary is ML090910490 (meeting transcripts, ML090840062 and ML090840063). Persons who do not have access to ADAMS, or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRCs PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415- 4737, or by e-mail at pdr.resource@nrc.gov.

The scoping process provides an opportunity for public participation to identify issues to be addressed in the plant-specific supplement to the GEIS and highlight public concerns and issues. The notice of intent identified the following objectives of the scoping process:

$ Define the proposed action

$ Determine the scope of the supplement to the GEIS and identify significant issues to be analyzed in depth

$ Identify and eliminate peripheral issues

$ Identify any environmental assessments and other environmental impact statements being prepared that are related to the supplement to the GEIS

$ Identify other environmental review and consultation requirements

$ Indicate the schedule for preparation of the supplement to the GEIS

$ Identify any cooperating agencies

$ Describe how the supplement to the GEIS will be prepared At the conclusion of the scoping period, the NRC staff and its contractor reviewed the transcripts and all written material received, and identified individual comments. Five (5) letters, and one e-mail that contained comments were also received during the scoping period. All comments and suggestions received orally during the scoping meetings or in writing were considered.

Each set of comments from a given commenter was given a unique alpha identifier (Commenter ID letter), allowing each set of comments from a commenter to be traced back to the transcript, letter, or e-mail in which the comments were submitted. Some commenters submitted comments through multiple sources (e.g., letter and afternoon or evening scoping meetings).

Comments were consolidated and categorized according to the topic within the proposed supplement to the GEIS or according to the general topic if outside the scope of the GEIS.

Comments with similar specific objectives were combined to capture the common essential

issues that had been raised in the source comments. Once comments were grouped according to subject area, the staff and contractor determined the appropriate action for the comment.

Table 1 identifies the individuals providing comments and the Commenter ID letter associated with each person's set(s) of comments. The Commenter ID letter is preceded by CNS-1. For oral comments, the individuals are listed in the order in which they spoke at the public meeting.

Accession numbers indicate the location of the written comments in ADAMS.

TABLE 1 - Individuals Providing Comments During Scoping Comment Period Comment Source and Commenters ADAMS Accession ID Commenter Affiliation (If Stated) Number(a)

CNS-1-A Martin Hansen Village Board of Brownville Afternoon Scoping Meeting CNS-1-B Glen Krueger Member of the Public Afternoon Scoping Meeting CNS-1-C Becky Cromer Falls City Economic Development Afternoon Scoping Meeting and Growth Enterprise CNS-1-D Arnold Ehlers City Clerk/Treasurer for the City of Afternoon Scoping Meeting Nebraska City, Nebraska CNS-1-E James Emergency Management Director Afternoon Scoping Meeting Gerwick for Richardson County, Nebraska CNS-1-F Robert Cole Nemaha County Emergency Evening Scoping Meeting Management Director CNS-1-G Rod Mayor of Falls City, Nebraska Evening Scoping Meeting Vandeberg CNS-1-H Larry Shepard U.S. Environmental Protection Evening Scoping Meeting Agency CNS-1-I Bob Engles Mayor of Auburn, Nebraska Evening Scoping Meeting CNS-1-J Kendall Auburn Chamber of Commerce Evening Scoping Meeting Neiman CNS-1-K David Sickel County Commissioner Richardson Evening Scoping Meeting County CNS-1-L Ron Asche Nebraska Public Power District Evening Scoping Meeting

Comment Source and Commenters ADAMS Accession ID Commenter Affiliation (If Stated) Number(a)

CNS-1-M Alan Richard Pawnee City Development Letter (ML090720067)

Corporation CNS-1-N Ashtin Paris Deputy Clerk Letter (ML090720068)

City of Rock Port CNS-1-O James Emergency Management Director Letter (ML090720066)

Gerwick for Richardson County, Nebraska CNS-1-P Larry Spepard U.S. Environmental Protection Email (ML091070269)

Agency CNS-1-Q Jill Dolberg Nebraska State Historic Letter (ML090650061)

Preservation Office CNS-1-R Jean Angell Nebraska Department of Natural Letter (ML090860762)

Resources (a) The accession number for the afternoon transcript is ML090840062 The accession number for the evening transcript is ML090840063 The comments and suggestions received as part of the scoping process are documented in this section and the disposition of each comment is discussed. Comments are grouped by category.

There were two categories as follows:

1. Comments in support of license renewal at CNS-1

2. General comments regarding the license renewal review of Cooper Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Each comment is summarized in the following pages. For reference, the unique identifier for each comment (Commenter ID letter listed in Table 1 plus the comment number) is provided. In those cases where no new environmental information was provided by the commenter, no further evaluation will be performed.

The preparation of the plant-specific supplement to the GEIS (which is the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS)) will take into account all the relevant issues raised during the scoping process. The SEIS will address both Category 1 and 2 issues, along with any new information identified as a result of scoping. The SEIS will rely on conclusions supported by information in the GEIS for Category 1 issues, and will include the analysis of Category 2 issues and any new and significant information. The draft plant-specific supplement to the GEIS will be made available for public comment. The comment period will offer the next opportunity for the applicant, interested Federal, State, and local government agencies, local organizations, and members of the public to provide input to the NRCs environmental review

process. The comments received on the draft SEIS will be considered in the preparation of the final SEIS. The final SEIS, along with the staffs safety evaluation report (SER), will provide much of the basis for the NRCs decision on the NPPD license renewal application.

Cooper Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Public Scoping Meeting Comments and Responses

1. Support for License Renewal at Cooper Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Comment: My name is Martin Hansen, a member of the Village Board of Brownville. I'm filling in for our chairman, Marty Hayes, today. I would like to welcome the members of the Nuclear Regulatory System to our community for this meeting. Brownville, while being a small community, we see the importance of Cooper Nuclear Station. It is, of course, the largest employer in our community and throughout southeastern Nebraska. But for our community, it is a little more than that. This community was here when the construction on Cooper started nearly 40 years ago. We are here on each day of operation which is around the clock. Cooper continues to operate safely and our community of Brownville appreciates that very much.

Cooper is a partner with the community. It has lent us support. One of the examples is the Village of Brownville Volunteer Fire Department. The management of Cooper has allowed our group of dedicated fire fighters to utilize their training facilities that has enhanced its firefighting capabilities and has cooperated in an effort and has enabled our department to upgrade its equipment and training capabilities over a number of years. I'm sure that you will hear a lot more from other communities about the economic impact of Cooper on the community and the importance it has on the economy. A 2002 economic study found that there would be detrimental impact to not only Brownville, but to other communities in this area, so Cooper is important to continue operation through the license extension of 20 years.

Emergency response is an important part of Cooper operation, and any need for that action to take place would be handled in a manner that is both professional and done for the protection of the public. Cooper Emergency Response organization takes it very seriously and each resident in a 10-mile zone around Cooper always receives the appropriate information about any possible emergency response activity on the site and would have comfort of knowledge that these plans are in place and tested annually.

Earlier this month, the Village Board of Brownville unanimously approved a resolution in support of Nebraska Public Power District at Cooper Nuclear Station license renewal for an additional 20 years. I would like to read that resolution into the official record at this time.

Resolution No. 2-2-09-1.

AWHEREAS, the Nebraska Public Power District Cooper Nuclear Station in Brownville became operational with startup in 1974 and has operated safely and efficiently for more than 30 years and its 828 megawatts of electricity generated; and WHEREAS, the Village of Brownville has had a longstanding history with Cooper Nuclear Station since the plant's construction, through refueling outages, and day-to-day operations; and WHEREAS, the Village of Brownville Volunteer Fire Department has been able to utilize training facilities to enhance the firefighting capabilities and this cooperative effort has allowed the department to upgrade equipment in training firefighters over the years;

WHEREAS, Nebraska Public Power District has continually reinvested in the Cooper Nuclear Station facility to access continued safety, clean, reasonable, and affordable production of electricity for Nebraskans across the State; and WHEREAS, the Cooper Nuclear Station is a critical asset as part of Nebraska Public Power District generation resources and the state's unique public power system, continues to assist in keeping state electricity rates among the lowest in the country; WHEREAS, more than 700 permanent jobs at Cooper Nuclear Station and extensive use of contractors in ongoing maintenance and refueling outages are organized and important to the economy of the Village of Brownville, Nemaha County, and surrounding communities in southeastern Nebraska; and WHEREAS, a 2002 economic study of the impact of the loss of Cooper Nuclear Station would be detrimental to the Village of Brownville and other communities in southeast Nebraska; and WHEREAS, the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission is the federal agency charged with oversight of our nation's vital nuclear facilities and encouraged public input and comment on license renewal and process from the neighborhood and communities; and WHEREAS, the Cooper Nuclear Station has continued to be a good neighbor to Brownville for more than three decades; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Village of Brownville Council supports the renewal of the license for the nuclear generation facility at Cooper Nuclear Station, and to assure their continued operations of safe, affordable, and important component of Nebraska's public power supply system for another 20 years; but BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Village of Brownville clerk is directed to make available copies of this resolution to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission at its upcoming Environment Scope Public Meeting.@

Again, I wish to thank the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for hosting this important public meeting, and we'll make ourselves available to you if you have any questions of us, thank you.

(CNS-1-A)

Comment: My name is Glen Krueger and I was the hospital administrator, and I don't think the present one is here at this time. I was the hospital administrator. I came in 1971, so was there when it was started and I retired in 2002. And I would like to say that we have had a full and wonderful cooperation with the Nebraska Public Power District for emergency services. We were able to send an employee down to Tennessee to learn more about radiation. Yes, we were learning more when it first started up, but we finally came that we were very comfortable, that we knew how to take care of if an accident did happen over here. We had full cooperation from them and I would totally support this new license.

But, also, as a citizen of Auburn, I would like to restate and I would like to have this new permit be renewed, because of the need that we have in the City of Auburn, if the need -- the people that work there. We have a lot of those employees who work in our church and a lot of those employees, in fact, I have three of those employees in my block where I live. Very appreciative of them. (CNS-1 -B)

Comment: I also would like to thank you for the opportunity to speak here this afternoon. My name is Beckie Cromer. I'm Executive Director of our Falls City Economic Development and Growth Enterprise. And I'm here this afternoon on behalf of the economic development team from

Falls City. We would like to confirm our unwavering support for the 20-year license extension of Cooper Nuclear Station. Falls City EDGE did pass a resolution of support for the 20-year license extension, and we have forwarded that resolution to NPPD officials, although, after reading the materials here today, I think we'll also forward that NRC with the information provided within the packets today. And in addition to that, our mayor will be speaking in support of Nebraska Public Power District this evening, as well.

Cooper Nuclear Station is an economic development gem that injects millions into our local economy by providing almost 800 jobs that pay more than double the Nebraska state average.

The decommissioning of Cooper Nuclear Station would result in monumental loss of revenue and jobs for our southeast Nebraska area. Additionally, Cooper Nuclear Station runs a very safe operation. It allows Nebraska to offer a diverse portfolio of power to our citizens.

I had the opportunity to tour Cooper Nuclear Station this week with many Falls City community leaders. The facility was top notch. The staff was professional and knowledgeable, and the safety measures in place for workers and the surrounding public exceeds benchmarks set by government agencies.

Southeast Nebraska is proud to have Cooper Nuclear Station as a partner in economic development and we ask that you grant the licensing request being made by Cooper Nuclear Station. Thank you. (CNS-1 -C)

Comment: Good afternoon. My name is Arnold Ehlers, City Clerk/Treasurer for the City of Nebraska City, Nebraska. I am here to present a resolution passed unanimously by the City Council and Mayor of Nebraska City, supporting the license renewal of Cooper Nuclear Station. I would also like to make you aware of the economic impact Cooper Nuclear Station has on southeast Nebraska, as well as southwestern Iowa and northwest Missouri, an economic impact that is over $500 million a year. But the economic impact is just one part of the contribution made by Nebraska Public Power District and its employees. NPPD employees belong to volunteer fire departments, serve on library boards, school boards, and many other boards and committees too numerous to mention. Their spouses and families are also very important contributors to the communities in which they live.

Over the years, Cooper has been a good safe partner and good neighbor to all of us. They have attracted employees from around the world, enhancing the multicultural experiences of the area.

We've actually become a global community due to this. It is a privilege to live in a public power state and in a city that owns its own utilities. Nebraska City, in fact all of Nebraska, benefits from the low-cost electricity that Cooper Nuclear plays a significant role in providing.

I have a resolution that I would like to have entered into the record. I won't bore you with the reading of it, unless it needs to be read. I thank you for this opportunity. (CNS-1-D)

Comment: Good afternoon. Many thanks to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for hosting this public forum. My name is Jim Gerwick, and I'm the Emergency Management Director for Richardson County, Nebraska, the county just south of here.

In my position, hardly a month has gone by where some form of interchange has not transpired between Cooper Nuclear Station's Emergency Management Department and other nuclear operations staff and my office in Richardson County. The referenced activities include quarterly emergency communication drills, unannounced communications checks, written correspondence involving improvements in emergency plans and training in many forms, to include FEMA, Federal Emergency Management Agency, evaluated radiological emergency preparedness exercises.

Other joint training activities include NPPD staff involvement in annual training of our local radiological emergency response organization, and our joint quarterly off-site training meetings.

Cooper Nuclear Station has fully demonstrated its ability to provide safe, reliable electricity for the citizens of the state of Nebraska. Richardson County has supported Cooper Nuclear Station in its off-site responsibilities to protect the public and property for many years, since the plant started, actually, and is glad to be part of the team that supports nuclear power. The bottom line in our realm of experience, the staff at NPPD and Cooper Nuclear Station is thoroughly professional and meticulous in attention to detail concerning their approach to public safety. In short, they are fully integrated and a key member of our public safety team.

And in view of their professional performance and contributions to our community, we support NPPD's application to continue to operate Cooper Nuclear Station for another 20 years.

In closing, Richardson County is proud to have Cooper Nuclear Station in the Richardson County area. (CNS-1-E)

Comment: Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight. I'm Robert Cole. I'm the Nemaha County Emergency Management Director. I wanted to make a few short statements. I've already submitted a letter of support on the relicensing application; however, I wanted to touch on a few of the highlights that I mentioned in the letter.

One of the great things about our relationship with Cooper Nuclear Plant is that they have been good partners for the communities that they are neighbors to. One example of that would be the fact that most of my day today was spent taking delivery on sirens that Cooper Nuclear has donated for several local communities in the area, both in Nebraska and Missouri, that lacked operational or modern sirens. These retired sirens from Cooper, although they are dating back to the 1970s, are well maintained and very functional and will certainly be a vital asset to communities that could not otherwise afford replacement of their siren equipment. That's a real benefit to everybody.

Also, my relationship with Cooper has been excellent. I correspond or talk to Cooper representatives at least monthly, generally more often, in regard to emergency planning exercises and just day-to-day communications checks. Every time I have talked to somebody from the station, they have always been very professional and very competent, and I have very great confidence in the plant and their operations. It's a joy to be here in Nemaha County, and one of that joys is serving the County in this relationship to Cooper Nuclear. Thanks very much for the opportunity to be here. (CNS-1-F)

Comment: Good evening. I have prepared comments which I'd be happy to give to you if you would like them at the end of the meeting. I apologize. I maybe have gotten a little bit too lengthy, but I'll try to talk fast.

My name is Rod Vandeberg, and I am the mayor of Falls City, Nebraska. Falls City is a community of 4,200, and is located about 20 miles south of Cooper Nuclear Station as you head toward the Nebraska/Kansas border.

Interestingly, I personally had the opportunity, along with 18 community members from Falls City, to tour Cooper Nuclear Station last Monday. I can speak for myself and the others who took the tour that we were very impressed by the serious and cordial manner in which NPPD employees were watching out for our personal safety while we were on tour, and also by the extent of the security presence at the site. This opportunity gave us all a little better first-hand look at Cooper Nuclear Station, which many of us had not seen, but have heard so much about over the years.

Perhaps properly so, Cooper is a well kept secret. And I would like to take this opportunity to thank everyone who participated with us in that tour. We had the opportunity to hear from the gentleman who heads the management company. And then we had the opportunity to be with several NPPD employees. And it was really an outstanding experience.

The impact of going inside such a facility and seeing how well the facility is maintained and how expansive the facility is, how it serves to protect employees, public, and the environment was time well spent. I want to thank NPPD for this opportunity.

Several months ago, I sat in a breakfast meeting right here in this building in Auburn and heard from your CEO, Ron Asche, and other NPPD employees about the license renewal process, what the needs for extending of licensing of Cooper for an additional 20 years means, and what does that mean not only for my community, but all of Nebraska. What I learned is that NPPD has put an extensive amount of money into facility improvements for safety and operations of the facility so that it can be an operation that will be able to operate safely and efficiently for an additional 20 years. What I also heard at that time was that replacing Cooper would take several billion dollars to construct another generating facility, probably using coal as fuel to replace the electric generation of Cooper. Just getting a facility sited may be a significant task, and replacing Cooper with that kind of facility may not be the most environmentally friendly one, as Cooper does not generate any greenhouse gases from its nuclear operations.

I realize that there are numerous areas that are required to be reviewed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission related to the license renewal application, many dealing with the environment, another part on how equipment is expected to last if Cooper Nuclear Station were to operate another 20 years. As I heard at our meeting in the fall, Nebraska Public Power District's Board of Directors has had the foresight to invest millions of dollars into the operation in order to continue that operation in a safe manner, and that is what we expect for the residents of Falls City, Richardson County, and southeast Nebraska.

Our community leaders in Falls City also heard from NPPD, at my request, to tell us more about the license renewal in a luncheon session in Falls City two or three months ago. Many in the room that day have had contact with Cooper employees, both personal or for business reasons, for we

have a contingent of employees that reside in Falls City and Richardson County, 101 employees to be exact.

From a socio-economic aspect, that number is important in small communities such as Falls City.

Cooper employees do business in our community. They are part of community activities, and they support our schools and services. These individuals operate an important electric generation for Nebraska, and they do it safely in a nuclear operation. On our tour, we were able to get a peek at a control room simulator and what these highly trained employees must train to do. The requirements are rigorous to meet the requirements to become a licensed operator.

A loss of Cooper would cause a severe negative impact on Falls City as would it be for all of southeastern Nebraska.

NPPD's CEO, Ron Asche, spoke to us last year about several maintenance issues at the plant. He could have easily passed over telling us that information, but he chose to do so, and he expressed confidence to us that NPPD would resolve these issues to the satisfaction of the NRC and return Cooper to the top level of operations for nuclear power plants in the country. And as I have learned, those words have been put into action and those findings have been resolved. Frankly, I believe Cooper is one of the safest nuclear plants in the United States.

I, and the members of the City Council of Falls City, recently passed a unanimous resolution of support for Cooper Nuclear Station's license extension for an additional 20 years. We feel that it is an important asset for southeast Nebraska and Nebraska in general, and I would like for this resolution to be included in the official meeting transcript tonight.

I want to thank the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for taking the time to hear from communities such as ours on this very important issue, not only locally, but nationally, as we work towards future energy independence. Thank you very much. (CNS-1-G)

Comment: Good evening. Thank you, Dave. And I'd like to thank the NRC. I'd also like to thank the cities and counties of southeastern Nebraska for the opportunity to attend this scoping meeting.

My name is Larry Shepard. I'm an environmental scientist with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, in our Kansas City Regional Office. EPA has 10 regional offices around the country. Our regional office is responsible for EPA program activities in Kansas, Iowa, Missouri, and Nebraska.

My point in speaking tonight was just to help everyone tonight to understand what EPA's role is in this process, this relicensing process. EPA will be reviewing the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement and providing comment, but also in actually scoring both the document and the project itself. And we will also, in addition to that, be providing comment -- scoping comment to NRC by the March 27th deadline. And that was really my whole purpose. If anyone has any questions after the meeting, I'll be hanging around also. Thank you very much. (CNS-1-H)

Comment: Good evening. My name is Bob Engles, and I'm the mayor of Auburn, Nebraska. I'd like to thank the NRC for this opportunity and specifically for holding this public forum.

As I was watching the NRC presentation, safety review and environmental impact studies were mentioned as key parts of the process. I trust that both NPPD and the NRC will conduct a

thorough process to identify issues that must be addressed in these areas so that Cooper Nuclear Station can continue operating for an additional 20 years.

That's exactly why I'm here. I'm here in support of extending the license for Nebraska Public Power District's Cooper Nuclear Station. I'll speak just a little bit about the socio-economic impact on my city in particular. From a practical standpoint, I'm not sure it makes sense to discard a proven and effective method of power generation, especially when it has served Auburn, Nemaha County, and the state of Nebraska for so many years as a safe and reliable source of electrical generation for the last 35 years in a manner that has protected the public and the environment.

Cooper Nuclear Station is an economic stimulus to Auburn and southeast Nebraska. Their footprint is a stabilizing factor in our community's economy. For example, they employ approximately 720 people, and half of those people live in Nemaha County; 234 of those people live in Auburn.

The plant's annual payroll is approximately $55 million. Over $17 million of that payroll goes to people that live in Auburn, and with just a little bit of math, that shows that the average income per employee living in Auburn is about $75,000. These employees are highly educated, highly trained and skilled, and they do a quality job day in and day out with safety as their prime responsibility.

Cooper employees have become a part of the fabric of this community over the years. They live here. They're involved in community activities. They're involved in our churches; they frequent the business community; they are involved in youth activities and social events within our community.

These people are our friends. They're our neighbors. Their kids attend our schools. They volunteer their time to make Auburn and southeast Nebraska a better place in which to live.

Late last year, following NPPD's submittal of a license renewal application, Ron Asche, CEO and President of NPPD, which owns Cooper, held a series of meetings within the community with myself and other elected officials from other communities and the business community. Mr. Asche pointed out that NPPD's Board of Directors has invested over $300 million in improvements to Cooper in preparation for the license extension. NPPD is serious about making these improvements that will enhance the safety of the operations, as well as continuing to generate low-cost electricity, something that Nebraskans expect and which NPPD is mandated under state law to do.

-Several years ago, NPPD discussed the possibility of closing Cooper. This community was concerned about that, primarily because of the impact on the economy of Auburn and southeast Nebraska. Closing Cooper would have been unfortunate. But NPPD's Board of Directors saw the value in keeping the facility operating and have done a great job in moving forward with the safe operations of the facility, something that was expected to continue for another 20 years.

Indeed, all Nebraskans benefit from the operation of Cooper Nuclear Station. Auburn has benefited from Cooper's operations directly, even though the plant is 10 miles away. Nebraska Public Power District has two facilities in our community that we believe are important for the operations of the site. The former Sheridan Elementary School has been transformed into a training center for Cooper employees and the many contractors who come into the community

every 18 months for refueling outages. We believe that the training facility plays a great part of the strong environmental responsibility and safe operations of the facility each day.

A second facility was remodeled in our downtown area and houses a state-of-the-art Emergency Operations Center which would operate as needed. Exercises are held on a regular basis from that facility, including ones with local emergency management personnel from southeast Nebraska.

As mayor, I'm confident in the ability of NPPD to operate and manage in a safe manner. What we may hear from people that are concerned about safety issues, we can all be concerned about safety issues. But throughout the years, I've come to know that the people at Cooper and NPPD have confidence and that they understand the risks associated with nuclear power generation and that they have been and continue to do everything in their power to ensure my safety and our community's safety, because the same people that are working at NPPD Cooper Nuclear Station live in Auburn. They live in Brownville, Nemaha County, Falls City, and Nebraska City.

And at this time, I'd like to introduce into the formal record a resolution that our City Council passed a while back unanimously approving support for the extension of the Cooper Nuclear Station license.

And once again, I'd like to thank the NRC for hosting these meetings in our community, and if there's anything our town can do to help you further this process, please do not hesitate to contact us. Thank you. (CNS-1-I)

Comment: Good evening. My name is Kendall Neiman and I'm President of Auburn Chamber of Commerce, and also the publisher of the Nemaha County Herald, the local weekly newspaper here. On behalf of the Auburn Chamber of Commerce, I'm expressing full support for the Nebraska Public Power District's application to extend the Cooper Nuclear Station for an additional 20 years.

We believe that Cooper's safety and performance speaks for NPPD's expertise in nuclear plant operations. Several years ago, it appeared that NPPD might close down the Cooper Nuclear Station. This was something that southeastern Nebraska could not afford to have happen. A community group had an economic study done that gave us a look at what we could see locally if the facility was closed. That was about six years ago, and that picture was not very pretty.

Devastating might be a better word. If Cooper Nuclear were not to continue operating after its current license expires, we could see those impacts all over southeastern Nebraska.

Over 700 employees live, work, shop, and are involved in the communities in southeastern Nebraska. A majority of these employees live right here in Auburn and Nemaha County. They are contributors to the community, but they are also workers at the nuclear power plant that emphasizes nuclear safety of all as a top priority.

I recently attended an open house held by NPPD in the Cooper Nuclear facility and was able to learn more about the license extension, safety, emergency response, and other operations of the facility. It's very complex, but I found that the people that I talked to, to be very knowledgeable and they were concerned with safety of the operations, but they were very proud of what they do on a daily basis. It is our hope that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's review of the license

application will be thorough in both the environmental review as well as the safety review of the Cooper Nuclear Station as required for license renewal. We believe that NPPD has done an excellent job in the operation of the facility as they have turned out a record generation year in 2007, have maintained a strong safety culture for the safety of the employees and the public, and maintained a high visible emergency response operation with local governments and continue to watch over a reliable generating source of electricity for Nebraskans with a watchful eye.

The Auburn Chamber of Commerce supports this license renewal extension and look forward to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's review of the facility and seeing a 20-year extension added to the existing license of the facility. Again, thank you for coming to Auburn and giving the community an opportunity to be heard. (CNS-1-J)

Comment: My name is David Sickel. I'm one of the three County Commissioners from Richardson County. I'm pleased to have the opportunity to speak to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission concerning the extension of the Cooper Nuclear Station's license for an additional 20 years.

While Richardson County may be somewhat outside the influence of Cooper Nuclear Station's operations, it is important to acknowledge that over the years this facility has been able to operate in a safe and effective manner for the residents of Nebraska. It is important that a complete review of the environmental impacts for 20 more years of operation be studied thoroughly by both the Nebraska Public Power District and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

As I understand another critical phase is a safety review. Again, this is important this type of review be conducted to ensure that equipment at the facility can operate an additional 20 years without having the impact on employee and public safety. The fact that much of this information is available to the public and can have public involvement is an important aspect of the entire process.

Cooper Nuclear Station is an important part of our community. It operates safely. The employees at Cooper are highly trained. Cooper generates a reliable source of electricity for the people of the state of Nebraska. Employees reside in communities such as Richardson County. Over the years, the presence of Cooper employees in southeast Nebraska has been an important part of our economy, our schools, or business community, and the community in which these folks live. The impact on this area from the loss of Cooper operations would create an economic hardship when you consider those losses. That loss would impact Richardson County, southeast Nebraska, and the complete state of Nebraska.

On behalf of the citizens of Richardson County, we are in support of the extension of the Cooper Nuclear Station's license renewal for an additional 20 years.

In a letter that I wrote to NPPD's CEO and President, Ron Asche, I explained that Richardson County was proud to have Cooper Nuclear Station in the Richardson County area. Cooper Nuclear Station clearly demonstrated its ability to provide safe and reliable electricity for citizens of Nebraska. I would like to mention that as the only public power state in the country, we enjoy having the fifth lowest cost electricity rates in the United States. Richardson County, through its Emergency Management has supported the facility in its off-site responsibilities to protect the

public for many years, and we are glad to be part of that team that supports Cooper and nuclear power.

Thank you for this opportunity to speak to you this evening. (CNS-1-K)

Comment: I'm Ron Asche, the President and CEO of Nebraska Public Power District, the owner and operator of Cooper Nuclear Station. We began our process of compiling our license renewal application several years ago, and submitted that to the NRC in September of this past year.

These public meetings tonight conducted by the NRC are a very important process in that relicensing process. They provide an opportunity for members of the local communities that surround Cooper Station and for other interested stakeholders to provide input directly to the NRC regarding our license application and any issues that they may have regarding the environmental impacts of extending Cooper's license for another 20 years, as well as any public safety issues that they may have. And I'd like to thank all of those that came this evening to express their comments to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, both in these meetings today and for comments that you might submit via letter or e-mail, et cetera. These are a very important part of that process.

I want to close just by saying that NPPD is committed to operating Cooper Station, both now and in the future, in a manner that protects the health and safety of the public and all of our employees and workers at the plant, as well as protecting the environment. We look forward to working together with the NRC over the course of the next several years in addressing issues that may arise, which we hope will ultimately result in an extension of our license for another 20 years to operate Cooper Station and continue to provide low cost, reliable, and safe energy to the members of our communities and the state of Nebraska as a whole. Thank you. (CNS-1-L)

Comment:

(CNS-1-M)

Comment:

(CNS-1-N)

Comment:

(CNS-1-O)

Response: The comments are supportive of license renewal. The comments are general in nature, provide no new information and, therefore, will not be evaluated further. No change to the scope of the Cooper Nuclear Station Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be made as a result of these comments.

2. General comments regarding the license renewal review of Cooper Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Comment:

(CNS-1-P)

(CNS-1-Q)

(CNS-1-R)

Response: With respect to the comments from the Nebraska State Historical Society (CNS Q), and the Nebraska Department of Natural Resources (CNS-1-R), these comments contain matter from consultations with other government agencies, which support the license renewal review process. No change to the scope of the Cooper Nuclear Station Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be made as a result of these comments.

With respect to the EPA scoping comments (CNS-1-P), regarding radiation, given the uncertainty involved with licensing the Yucca Mountain Nevada facility and the extremely long

time-frames needed to secure Congressional approval and complete site preparation for any possible alternative permanent site for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel, all utilities planning on extending operation of existing nuclear units should consider contingencies for long-term storage of waste on-site.

The SEIS will not include a discussion on the storage of spent nuclear fuel. This is because the NRC fully evaluated and addressed this issue in our Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants (NUREG-1437) and in its regulations. The current and potential environmental impacts from spent fuel storage onsite at the current reactor sites have been studied extensively and are well understood. The storage of spent fuel in spent fuel pools was considered for each plant in the safety and environmental reviews at the construction permit and operating license stage. The NRC has studied the safety and environmental effects from the temporary storage of spent fuel after the cessation of reactor operations (which may include the term of a revised or renewed license), and it published a generic determination of no significant environmental impact (the Waste Confidence Rule) in its regulations at 10 CFR 51.23. 10 CFR 51.23 (a) states:

The Commission has made a generic determination that, if necessary, spent fuel generated in any reactor can be stored safely and without significant environmental impact for at least 30 years beyond the licensed life for operation (which may include the term of a revised or renewed license) of that reactor at its spent-fuel storage basin or at either on-site or off-site independent fuel storage installations. Further, the Commission believes that there is reasonable assurance that at least one mined geological repository will be available within the first quarter of the twenty-first century, and sufficient repository capacity will be available within 30 years beyond the licensed life for operation of any reactor to dispose of the commercial high-level waste and spent fuel originating in such reactor and generated up to that time.

In accordance with this determination, the rule also provides that no discussion is required concerning the environmental impacts of spent fuel storage for the period following the term of the reactor operating license, including a renewed license.

With respect to the EPA scoping comments (CNS-1-P), regarding past contamination associated with the operation of CNS, particularly source and fate of tritium in the system, the draft SEIS will have a discussion on the impacts of radioactive liquid effluents discharged into the Missouri River. The discussion will evaluate the radiological dose impact to members of the public as well the impact to the environment. The SEIS will also discuss the results of Coopers radiological environmental monitoring program in which environmental sample media are collected and analyzed in order to evaluate the radiological impacts, if any, of plant operation on the environment.

With respect to the EPA scoping comments (CNS-1-P), regarding water quality, the SEIS will discuss NPDES permits and related activities including any updated information, available river flow including low flows, USACE river flow control operations, as well as aquatic and terrestrial ecosystem issues. The NRC staff does recognize that the river ecological studies are generally out of date, and will address this issue in the EIS. The NRC staff is doing a search for more recent data. The staffs analysis, findings, as well as references and data used will be outlined

in the EIS and referenced for publicly availability. Climate change is not discussed in the EIS in any significant detail or regulatory context.

The EPA scoping comment (CNS-1-P), regarding Environmental Management Systems, has been withdrawn by the commenter and is not further addressed here by the NRC staff.