ML13114A124
| ML13114A124 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 04/24/2013 |
| From: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | |
| Sayoc E, 415-4084 | |
| References | |
| NRC-4104 | |
| Download: ML13114A124 (84) | |
Text
Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Title:
Sequoyah Units 1 and 2 License Renewal Scoping Meeting Evening Session Docket Number: 50-327 and 50-328 Location:
Soddy-Daisy, Tennessee Date:
April 3, 2013 Work Order No.:
NRC-4104 Pages 1-84 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
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
+ + + + +
3 SEQUOYAH UNITS 1 AND 2 4
LICENSE RENEWAL SCOPING MEETING 5
EVENING SESSION 6
+ + + + +
7 Soddy-Daisy Hall 8
9835 Dayton Pike 9
Soddy-Daisy, Tennessee 37379 10
+ + + + +
11 April 3, 2013 12
+ + + + +
13 6:00 p.m.
14 NRC REPRESENTATIVES IN ATTENDANCE 15 BOB HAGAR 16 GERRI FEHST 17 MARK YOO 18 EMMANUEL SAYOC 19 DAVID WRONA 20 JOEY LEDFORD 21 GALEN SMITH 22 WESLEY DESCHAINE 23 24 25
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
CONTENTS 1
Welcome and Purpose of Meeting.................... 3 2
Overview of License Renewal 3
and Environmental Review Process.............
9 4
Questions About Material Presented............... 24 5
Public Comments................................... 45 6
Closing........................................... 83 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
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
1 P R O C E E D I N G S 2
(6:00 p.m.)
3 MR. HAGAR: Good evening, everyone. My 4
name is Bob Hagar. I'm a Senior Project Engineer with 5
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the Region IV Office 6
in Arlington, Texas. And I'm here this evening to help 7
facilitate this meeting with the help of my colleague 8
Gerri Fehst, who's sitting in the back there.
9 As Facilitators our role is to help this 10 meeting run smoothly. We're going to ensure that 11 everyone who has something to say in this meeting has 12 an opportunity to say it and to be heard. And we'll 13 also try to keep us on schedule. So we're going to do 14 our best to help make this meeting a worthwhile 15 experience for everyone and we hope that you'll help 16 us do that.
17 I think most of you know that TVA has filed 18 an application with the NRC for renewal of the operating 19 licenses for the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant for an additional 20 20 years. The NRC is reviewing that application and 21 we'll decide whether to renew those licenses. And this 22 meeting is a part of that review process.
23 The purposes of this meeting are to tell 24 you about the license renewal and environmental scoping 25
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
process and to obtain input from you about the 1
environmental issues that the NRC should consider during 2
that review.
3 So as I mentioned -- wait a minute. We've 4
got a person there in the white. As I mentioned Gerri 5
and I are going to facilitate this meeting. There we 6
go. And this meeting really is three parts.
7 First we'll hear a presentation from the 8
NRC staff about the license renewal and the Environmental 9
Review processes. And information in that presentation 10 will help you understand what's involved with the license 11 renewal at Sequoyah.
12 And then second we'll take 10 to 15 minutes 13 to give you an opportunity to ask questions about the 14 material that was presented and for the NRC staff to 15 answer those questions.
16 And copies of the presentation were on the 17 desk outside, on the table outside. If you want a copy 18 and didn't pick one up, raise your hand and either Gerri 19 or I will make sure you get a copy.
20 But we're going to keep the presentations 21 short and we hope that the questions are relatively few 22 so we can get to the main reason why we're here and that's 23 to give you an opportunity to provide input to the scoping 24 process.
25
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
During that part you get to say whatever 1
you want to say about the license renewal process. Now 2
when you signed in today, you may have noted the yellow 3
and blue cards on the table. The yellow cards are for 4
people who want to speak in the meeting today, and the 5
blue cards are for people who just want to have their 6
names added to the mailing list. And if you want to 7
speak and did not fill out a card and if you decide any 8
time during this meeting that you want to speak, just 9
raise your hand and either Gerri or I will get a card 10 to you.
11 If you are going to speak, we need your name 12 on a card for two reasons. One is we want to make sure 13 we have an accurate list of the speakers in this meeting, 14 and we also want to be able to spell your name correctly 15 in the meeting transcript.
16 Speaking of transcripts, we are recording 17 this meeting to make sure that we fully capture your 18 comments. And later on we'll transcribe that recording 19 into a written document. And that written document will 20 be the official record of this meeting. And we need 21 that document to be accurate. And you can help us 22 produce an accurate transcript in four ways.
23 First, if you're going to speak, we want you to 24 use a microphone. And during the question and answer 25
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
session, I will bring the microphone to you. And if 1
you're going to speak in the third part of this meeting, 2
you'll come up here and speak into this microphone.
3 That's how we're going to ensure that what you have to 4
say gets recorded.
5 The next thing is the first time you speak 6
we want you to identify yourself and the organization 7
or organizations that you represent. Also if you have 8
an uncommon name or a name that has an unusual spelling, 9
we want you to spell your name, too. Again so we can 10 get it correct.
11 And third, to ensure that the recording is 12 clear, please don't hold side conversations and don't 13 interrupt the speaker. That's because if the microphone 14 picks up two people speaking at the same time, and we 15 can't tell from the recording who said what.
16 And finally, please silence your cell phone 17 and any other personal electronics you have with you 18 so that the other meeting participants can hear the 19 proceedings and so that your phone ringing and your 20 conversation don't get recorded.
21 Now I'll take just a minute to introduce 22 the staff, some of the NRC staff members who are in 23 attendance. And the NRC staff if you'd stand up when 24 I call your name so people can see who you are.
25
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
Mark Yoo is the -- I'm sorry, I got out of 1
order. But anyway Mark Yoo is the Safety Project 2
Manager.
3 Emmanuel Sayoc is the Environmental Project 4
Manager.
5 And Nancy Martinez is a Technical Reviewer 6
in the Division of License Renewal.
7 Dave Wrona is a Branch Chief in a Division 8
of License Renewal.
9 Joey Ledford is a Public Affairs Officer 10 from the NRC Office in Atlanta.
11 And Galen Smith is the Senior Resident at 12 Sequoyah and he is not here this evening.
13 And Wesley Deschaine is the Resident 14 Inspector and he is not present.
15 Now the NRC staff -- oh, Galen is there.
16 Sorry, Galen. Didn't see you. So Galen Smith is the 17 Senior Resident Inspector at the Sequoyah Plant.
18 Now the NRC staff is going to do their best 19 to answer any questions you have about license renewal 20 or about any other regulatory topics you want to discuss.
21 22 But please keep in mind there's only a few 23 NRC staff members here tonight. And you may ask a 24 question that's outside their areas of expertise. So 25
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
the best person to provide an answer may not be here.
1 If that happens, if you ask a question that the available 2
staff can't answer, give you a good answer to, they'll 3
do their best to have the right person get back to you 4
within a few days with a good answer.
5 Another item I hope that you picked upon 6
is the -- when you came in was our Public Meeting Feedback 7
form. You can fill that out tonight and hand it to one 8
of the NRC staff. Or you can take it home and it in 9
the mail sometime in the future because the postage is 10 free. Your assessment of how today's meeting goes will 11 help us improve future meetings. So please take a moment 12 to tell us what you think.
13 Finally, I hope everybody noticed that the 14 restrooms are just outside this door. And if we have 15 to evacuate the building, we will leave through those 16 two doors and then turn right and go outside and be 17 accounted for. And security is being provided by the 18 two officers sitting by the door in the back.
19 So first, is everyone okay with the ground 20 rules that I've described for this meeting? No 21 objections?
22 Do you have any questions about any topic 23 I've covered? Okay, no questions.
24 So with that, I'll hand this meeting over 25
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
to Mark and I'll be back when we move to the second part 1
of the meeting. And again if you have questions about 2
the material that's presented, wait until that second 3
part of the meeting and you'll have a chance to ask and 4
the NRC staff to answer them.
5 So here you go, Mark.
6 MR. YOO: Good evening, my name is Mark Yoo.
7 I'm one of the Safety Project Managers within the 8
Division of License Renewal and I'm coordinating the 9
staff's review associated with the Sequoyah Nuclear 10 Plant Units 1 and 2 License Renewal Application.
11 Thank you all for taking the time to come 12 to this meeting.
13 Tonight we will provide an overview of the 14 license renewal review process which includes both a 15 Safety Review and an Environmental Review. We will 16 describe ways in which the public can participate in 17 the Sequoyah license renewal process. I'd like to 18 reiterate that the most important part of tonight's 19 meeting is to receive any comments that you may have 20 on the scope of the Environmental Review. We also will 21 give you some information on how you can make comments 22 if you prefer not to speak at this meeting. I hope the 23 information we'll provide will help you understand the 24 license renewal process and the roles you all can have 25
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 in the process.
1 Before I get into the discussion of the 2
license renewal process, I'd like to take a minute to 3
talk about the NRC in terms of what we do and what our 4
mission is.
5 The NRC is a federal agency that regulates 6
the civilian use of nuclear material.
7 The Atomic Energy Act authorizes the NRC 8
to grant a 40-year operating license for nuclear power 9
reactors. I'd like to highlight that this 40-year term 10 was based primarily on economic consideration and 11 anti-trust factors, not on safety or technical 12 limitations. The Atomic Energy Act also allows for 13 license renewal.
14 The National Environmental Policy Act of 15 1969, or NEPA, established a national policy for 16 considering the impact of federal decision making on 17 the human environment. Emmanuel will discuss NEPA in 18 greater detail.
19 The NRC's mission is three-fold: To ensure 20 adequate protection of public health and safety, to 21 promote the common defense and security, and to protect 22 the environment.
23 The NRC accomplishes its mission through 24 a combination of regulatory programs and processes such 25
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 as establishing rules and regulations, conducting 1
inspections, issuing enforcement actions, and assessing 2
licensee performance. We also evaluate operating 3
experience from nuclear power plants across the country 4
and internationally as well.
5 The NRC has Resident Inspectors at all 6
operating nuclear power plants. These Inspectors are 7
considered the eyes and ears of the NRC. They carry 8
out our safety mission on a daily basis and are on the 9
front lines of ensuring acceptable safety performance 10 and compliance with nuclear regulatory requirements.
11 I would like to mention a few very important 12 areas of NRC oversight that routinely come up during 13 our interactions with members of the public. The NRC 14 staff addresses these areas of performance every day 15 as part of the ongoing regulatory oversight provided 16 for all currently operating power reactors. They 17 include current safety performance as defined by NRC 18 inspection
- findings, violations, and general 19 assessments of plant performance, emergency planning, 20 and security.
21 For specific information on current 22 performance of Sequoyah, a user link is provided on the 23 slide. This is also in your handout. The NRC monitors 24 and provides regulatory oversight of activities in these 25
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 areas on an ongoing basis under the current operating 1
license. Thus, we do not reevaluate them in license 2
renewal. That's not to say they're not important. We 3
just do not duplicate the regulatory process in these 4
areas for license renewal.
5 The NRC received Sequoyah's Application for 6
License Renewal on January 15th, 2013, requesting an 7
additional 20 years of operation. The current operating 8
licenses for Sequoyah expire in 2020 and 2021.
9 Licensees can submit an Application for License Renewal 10 after it's operated for 20 years. The NRC has determined 11 that 20 years of operation provides enough information 12 for the staff to make an informed decision on license 13 renewal.
14 The first step of the license renewal 15 process is to perform an Acceptance and a Sufficiency 16 Review of the application. The purpose of this review 17 is to determine if the application had provided the 18 required information. The required information 19 includes technical information about plant structures 20 and components and how the applicant proposes to manage 21 the aging of the structure's components, technical 22 specifications defining the operating parameters of the 23 plant. The application indicates if any changes or 24 additions to technical specifications are necessary to 25
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 manage the effects of aging during the period of extended 1
operation.
2 The application also includes an 3
Environmental
- Report, which is the applicant's 4
assessment of the environmental impacts of continued 5
operation.
6 If the application has the required 7
information, then it is considered acceptable and it 8
is put on the NRC's formal docket. And the staff will 9
perform a full review. The NRC has accepted and docketed 10 the Sequoyah License Renewal Application by notice in 11 the Federal Register on March 5th, 2013.
12 This flow chart highlights that the license 13 renewal process involves two parallel reviews, the 14 Safety Review and the Environmental Review. These two 15 reviews evaluate separate aspects of the License Renewal 16 Application.
It also features three other 17 considerations in the Commission's decision on whether 18 or not to renew an operating license.
19 One of these considerations is the 20 Independent Review performed by the Advisory Committee 21 on reactor safeguards commonly referred to by its acronym 22 ACRS. Statutorily mandated by the Atomic Energy Act 23 of 1954, the Advisory Committee is a group of scientists 24 and nuclear safety experts who serve as a consulting 25
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 body to the Commission. The Advisory Committee reviews 1
only the License Renewal Application, the NRC staff's 2
Safety Evaluation, and the inspection findings. The 3
Advisory Committee reports their findings and 4
recommendations directly to the Commission.
5 The dotted lines show that hearings may also 6
be conducted if interested stake holders submit concerns 7
or contentions and their request for a hearing is 8
granted. The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, an 9
adjudicatory panel, will conduct the hearings. The 10 Commission considers the outcome of the hearing process 11 in its decision on whether or not to issue a renewed 12 operating license.
13 As part of the Environmental Review, the 14 staff consults with local, state, federal, and tribal 15 officials, such as the Environmental Protection Agency.
16 And the staff holds public meetings to receive comments 17 on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement.
18 Now I'm going to describe the license 19 renewal review processes in a little more detail, 20 starting with the Safety Review. To better understand 21 the license renewal process, it's good to know the safety 22 principles that guide license renewal.
23 The first principle is that current 24 regulatory process is adequate to ensure that the 25
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 licensing basis of all operating plants provides and 1
maintains an acceptable level of safety with the 2
exception of detrimental effects of aging.
3 The second principle is that the current 4
plant's specific licensing basis must be maintained 5
during the renewal term in the same manner and to the 6
same extent as during the original licensing term. In 7
other words, the same rules that apply under the current 8
license will apply in the renewal term. In addition, 9
a renewed license will include conditions that must be 10 met to ensure aging of structures and components 11 important to safety is adequately managed so that the 12 plant's current licensing basis is maintained through 13 the period of extended operation.
The Safety 14 Review focuses on the aging of passive and long-lived 15 structures and components and systems that NRC deems 16 important to plant safety. We consider safety related 17 systems, structures, and components, for example, the 18 reactor containment. Non-safety related systems, 19 structures, and components which if they fail could 20 affect safety related systems, structures, and component 21 functions. For example, a piece of equipment directly 22 above a safety related component and system structure 23 components relied upon for compliance with regulations 24 for fire protection, environmental qualification, 25
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 pressurized thermal shock, anticipated transients 1
without scram, and station blackout.
2 The staff's main objective in this review 3
is to determine if the effects of aging will be adequately 4
managed by the applicant. The results of the Safety 5
Review are documented in a Safety Evaluation Report, 6
or SER.
7 Now that you know what is subject to review, 8
I will talk about how the NRC looks at all the 9
information. The Safety Review comprises of numerous 10 rigorous aspects. The technical staff reviews the 11 applicant's License Renewal Application and supporting 12 documentation to determine the applicant's methodology 13 to identify the systems, structures, and components 14 within the scope of license renewal that's subject to 15 an aging management review to determine if the 16 methodology has been properly implemented and to 17 determine with reasonable assurance if the effects of 18 aging for certain systems, structures, and components 19 will be adequately managed or monitored by new or 20 existing programs and surveillance activities.
21 The staff uses site audits to verify the 22 technical basis of the License Renewal Application and 23 to confirm that the applicant's Aging Management 24 Programs and activities conform with how they are 25
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 described in the application. The staff documents the 1
basis and conclusions of its review in a Safety 2
Evaluation Report, which is publicly available. In 3
addition, a team of specialized inspectors travel to 4
the reactor site to verify that the Aging Management 5
Programs are being implemented, modified, or planned 6
consistent with the License Renewal Application.
7 Finally as I have mentioned, the Advisory 8
Committee on Reactor Safeguards performs in an 9
independent review of the License Renewal Application, 10 the staff's Safety Evaluation Report, and inspection 11 findings and makes a recommendation to the Commission 12 regarding the proposed action to issue a renewed 13 operating license.
14 This slide shows important milestones for 15 the Safety Review process. It is important to note that 16 these dates are tentative. Schedule changes may result 17 from a host of reasons. If significant issues are 18 identified, the license renewal review may be suspended 19 indefinitely or terminated.
20 That concludes a description of the Safety 21 Review. The Environmental Review will be discussed by 22 the Environmental Project Manager, Emmanuel Sayoc.
23 MR. SAYOC: Thank you, Mark. My name is 24 Emmanuel Sayoc and I will be concentrating on the 25
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 environmental portion of the review and on this 1
presentation.
2 The review is performed in accordance with 3
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, commonly 4
referred to as NEPA. NEPA established a national policy 5
for considering environmental impacts and provides the 6
basic architecture for federal Environmental Reviews.
7 All federal agencies must follow a systematic approach 8
in evaluating potential impacts and also to assess 9
alternatives to those actions. The NEPA process 10 involves public participation and public disclosure.
11 The NRC's environmental regulations implementing the 12 requirements of NEPA are contained in 10 Code of Federal 13 Regulations, Part 51.
14 Our Environmental Review considers the 15 impact of license renewal and any mitigation for those 16 impacts considered significant. We also consider the 17 impacts of alternatives to the license renewal, 18 including the impacts of not issuing the renewed license.
19 We document our review in an Environmental Impact 20 Statement, which is made publicly available.
21 Ultimately the purpose of the Environmental 22 Review is to determine whether the environmental impacts 23 of license renewal are reasonable in combination with 24 other reviews and to make sure a recommendation to the 25
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 Commission on whether or not to renew their license or 1
not.
2 For a license renewal review the NRC 3
environmental staff looks at a wide range of potential 4
impacts. Additionally, we consult with various 5
federal, state, and local officials, as well including 6
Indian nations. Examples include the U.S. Fish and 7
Wildlife Service, Environmental Protection Agency, 8
Tennessee Department of Environmental
- Quality, 9
Tennessee State Historic Preservation
- Offices, 10 Tennessee tribal nations that have historic ties to the 11 local area and the surrounding states. We gather 12 pertinent information from these sources and ensure it 13 is considered in our analysis.
14 The Environmental Review begins with a 15 scoping process which is an assessment of specific 16 impacts and significant issues that the staff consider 17 in preparing the Sequoyah Environmental Impact 18 Statement. Currently this is where we are in the 19 process. Information that will be gathered from you 20 tonight and in the next few weeks will be considered 21 and included in an Environmental Impact Statement.
22 We recognize that some impacts are similar, 23 if not identical, at all nuclear power plants. So to 24 improve the efficiency, we have developed a Generic 25
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 Environmental Impact Statement that addresses a number 1
of impacts that are common to all nuclear power plants.
2 The staff supplements that Generic Environmental Impact 3
Statement with a Site Specific Environmental Impact 4
Statement in which we address issues that are specific 5
to Sequoyah. The staff also reexamines the conclusions 6
reached in a Generic Environmental Impact Statement to 7
determine if there are any new and significant 8
information that would change those conclusions.
9 The scoping period started on March 8th, 10 2013 with a Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS and conduct 11 scoping, which was published in the Federal Register.
12 The NRC will accept comments to the scope of the 13 Environmental Review until May 3, 2013.
14 In general we are looking for information 15 about the environment -- or rather the environmental 16 impacts from the continued operation of Sequoyah. You 17 can assist this process by telling us, for example, what 18 aspects of your local community we should focus on, what 19 local environmental, social, and economic issues the 20 NRC would examine during our review, what other major 21 projects are in progress or planned in the area, and 22 what reasonable alternatives are most appropriate to 23 this region. Those are just some of the examples of 24 the input we seek through the environmental scoping 25
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 process.
1 We don't know your community like you do, 2
so your comments tonight will help us create a thorough 3
review. Public comments are an important part of the 4
Environmental Review process.
5 So how will we use your comments? All of 6
your comments to us, whether provided verbally during 7
this meeting or in a written letter, fax, or email, are 8
considered and addressed. We respond to each comment 9
as part of the Environmental Impact Statement. The EIS 10 is one of the factors, as well as several others shown 11 here, that influence the Commission's decision to renew 12 the license or not.
13 In addition to providing verbal and written 14 comments at this meeting, there are other ways you can 15 submit comments. You can submit comments online using 16 the Federal Rulemaking Website at regulation.gov 17 website. Enter the key word NRC-2013-0037. This will 18 give you a list of Federal Register notices. The top 19 one says License Renewal Application for Sequoyah 20 Nuclear Power Plant Units 1 and 2, Tennessee Valley 21 Authority. There is an icon to the right hand side to 22 submit a comment. If you have any problems, please give 23 me a call and I'll direct you to the person who knows 24 the regulation.gov process.
25
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 You can fax your comments to the above 1
number. Please reference Sequoyah License Renewal in 2
the fax.
3 Please note that comments will not be edited 4
to remove any identifying or contact information. Do 5
not include any information in the comments that you 6
don't want to be publicly disclosed.
As I
7 mentioned, the deadline for submitting comments is May 8
3, 2013. You can provide written comments by mail to 9
the Chief of our Rules, Announcements, and Directives 10 Branch at the address provided on the slide. And finally 11 if you happen to be in the D.C. area, you can provide 12 written comments in person during business hours.
13 This slide shows important milestones to 14 the Environmental Review process. As Mark said, these 15 dates are subject to change based on the progress of 16 the review. The opportunity to submit contentions for 17 a hearing closes on May 6, 2013. Also the opportunity 18 to submit environmental comments closes on May 3, 2013.
19 20 Please note that a Draft Supplemental 21 Environmental Impact Statement is scheduled to be issued 22 for public comment on February 2014 with an associated 23 public meeting to receive your comments on this 24 preliminary document.
25
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 Hard copies of the License Renewal 1
Application and Environmental Report may be found in 2
the library shown on this site -- on this slide, I mean.
3 The Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 4
will also be available at this library when it is 5
published for comment. These documents will also be 6
on the NRC's website at the website address shown at 7
the bottom of this slide.
8 As you came in, you were asked to fill out 9
a registration card at our reception table. If you've 10 included your address on the card, we will mail you a 11 CD copy of the draft and final Environmental Impact 12 Statement.
13 Mark and I are the primary points of contact 14 at the NRC for license renewal process for Sequoyah.
15 Our contact information is provided on this slide and 16 also on your handout.
17 That concludes my presentation and at this 18 point I'll turn it over back to Bob for questions.
19 MR. HAGAR: Okay, now this is the period 20 where if you have any questions about the material that 21 was presented, this is the time to ask them. And if 22 you have a question, I'll meet you in the aisle way, 23 and we'll get the NRC staff to answer your questions.
24 Here we go. Would you stand up, please?
25
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 And give us your name and your question, please.
1 MR. PADOCK: My name is Brian Padock. And 2
my question is has the Generic Environmental Impact 3
Statement ever been modified in light of consequent 4
things that the NRC has learned from accidents or 5
Fukushima or any other change in its situation?
6 MR. SAYOC: Hello, can everybody hear me?
7 You had mentioned the Environmental Impact Statement.
8 As a matter of fact, we're in the process of updating 9
the rulemaking part of the one, including the Generic 10 Environmental Impact Statement with associated 11 documents.
12 Particularly in terms Fukushima impacts, 13 that's not a focus of the updates or of the guise. But 14 that is something that's very important that the NRC 15 is addressing. And it's addressed by -- there's a 16 near-term task force or a directorate that specifically 17 addresses the effects and lessons learned from the 18 Fukushima accident. And they're on our public website 19 there's a specific link to Fukushima lessons learned 20 and all the recommendations and directives that the task 21 force has been implementing.
If you have any 22 further questions I can -- if you need any further 23 details, I can point you to the right people.
24 MR. HAGAR: Any other questions?
25
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 Ma'am, if you would stand up, please?
1 MS. HARRIS: My name is Ann Harris. And 2
I noticed on the presentation that they said that they 3
received this application January 2013. Well, have they 4
been working around 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> a day? Because this is 5
only the first of April and did they get it done that 6
quick what they wanted to do? How long have they been 7
working on this before they prepared and put out this 8
document?
9 MR. YOO: Well, we received the application 10 on January 15th, and we did an Acceptance and a 11 Sufficiency Review to determine if the application has 12 all the information that we need to begin our review.
13 And we completed that, I believe, sometime in February 14 or March time frame. And that's when we docketed the 15 information by Federal Notice on the 15th. And now that 16 we have documented inforation, we will begin our review.
17 And that is a long 22-month process. That's what the 18 timetable says.
19 MS. HARRIS: Well, how long had you been 20 working on --
21 MR. HAGAR: Wait, wait. We need to get you 22 recorded.
23 MS. HARRIS: He knows. He can hear me.
24 How long did you work on this prior to putting out this 25
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 Notice though. Surely you didn't start January of 2013.
1 Where did you get all this information that you're 2
putting out here on this scope, what you've done today?
3 4
You know there's a lot of information here 5
that's available today. How did you come by that? Are 6
you just trusting TVA? Because that's not a good idea.
7 8
MR. YOO: Well, what information? Sorry.
9 MS. HARRIS: I'm just going by your 10 calendar date. I'll put this up what you showed up here 11 on the board this guy had here. He had it up there a 12 few minutes ago.
13 MR. YOO: Are you asking the environmental 14 one or the safety one?
15 MS. HARRIS: The safety.
16 MR. YOO: Okay.
17 MR. HAGAR: Make sure we know what the 18 question is.
19 MS. HARRIS: I want to know what was the 20 back work that you did and how long did you work on it 21 from the application before you put it on out here and 22 put in a public meeting?
23 MR. YOO: I guess the date --
24 MR. HAGAR: You had to have done some work 25
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 prior January the 15th. You could not have produced 1
this because I know how fast or how slow these things 2
work. So there had to be some work. And I want to know 3
about what kind of informal meetings, you may call them 4
instead of public meetings, where you met with TVA to 5
put together this application.
6 MR. YOO: The application, you're right, 7
is put together by TVA. The only thing we've done since 8
January 2013 is accepted it and deemed that it has enough 9
information. We just started our review. And as you 10 can see from these dates the only thing we've done is 11 that we've accepted the application and we've put down 12 some notices for contingency hearings and to collect 13 comments. This is the very beginning of the review.
14 So how long have we been working on it?
15 Since January.
16 MS. HARRIS: Before then. It had to have 17 been before then.
18 (Background discussion) 19 MR. HAGAR: If you have a question, have 20 we answered your question?
21 MS. HARRIS: No.
22 MR. HAGAR: Okay.
23 MS. HARRIS: So if he's talking about since 24 January 2013. I'm talking about prior to January the 25
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 15th, 2013.
1 MR. YOO: In terms of license renewal NRC 2
hasn't worked on Sequoyah's license renewal prior to 3
their receiving their application.
4 MS. HARRIS: Nobody?
5 MR. YOO: Not for license renewal, but 6
ongoing review and reactor oversight process has been 7
ongoing.
8 MR. SAYOC: In December we did a scouting 9
trip, a pre-application scouting trip where we met with 10 local officials to discuss our process and the upcoming 11 application. We also met with TVA to discuss a brief 12 presentation on our process and what our review is going 13 to entail. And that happened, I believe, December of 14 2012, about a month before. We didn't discuss with them 15 the application. All we did was discuss our license 16 renewal process and our, you know, general milestones.
17 MR. HAGAR: Well, let's see if there was 18 any follow-up questions about this same thing.
19 Would you stand up, please?
20 MR. ANDERSON: My name is Tim Anderson and 21 I just had a follow-up question on the Generic Impact 22 Study. And my question is since there's still seven 23 years before this license expires, why are we pushing 24 this through prior to getting any feedback or making 25
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 any changes based on Fukushima, which is obviously an 1
event that's still affecting the country right now and 2
the oceans and everything else? So I'm just wondering 3
why is this not being put on the front burner?
4 Why are you using an old application, an 5
old process when there's new information?
6 And also what was the date that the Generic 7
EIS was actually put into service?
8 MR. SAYOC: Okay, the Generic Environmental 9
Impact Statement, I mean the one prior to that was in 10 1996. And like I said, we're updating it now. So it's 11 been around for a while now. And we've done about 14 12 reviews that have been referenced in the Generic 13 Environmental Impact Statement, so we're updating it.
14 15 Now you had mentioned, you know, why aren't 16 we including Fukushima type events in terms of license 17 renewal. I mean I guess the short answer is we are 18 addressing that. The Agency is addressing the lesson 19 learned, the impacts on Fukushima, you know, things like 20 seismic flooding.
21 But those are ongoing issues that aren't 22 specific to license renewal. They affect plants that 23 are in current operation and including those that are 24 needing license renewal. So those are being addressed, 25
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 just not in the license renewal process. They're being 1
addressed under our ongoing reactor oversight process.
2 3
And as I had mentioned, there is a task force 4
specifically for reviewing Fukushima type related 5
incidents and accidents and seeing how those affect 6
nuclear power plants that are currently in operation.
7 And so those are being addressed. It's just a 8
different -- it's a different review.
9 MR. ANDERSON: This license application is 10 not contingent upon any information from Fukushima?
11 Yes or no?
12 MR. SAYOC: It is, it is. The term for 13 licensing in the extended period of operations if 14 Sequoyah Power Plant's license is extended and the state 15 and the stake holders decide to keep Sequoyah in 16 operation. And they will have to abide by the findings 17 on the Commission as put in place related to Fukushima 18 flooding, seismic, and other things in that area because 19 they will have to abide by ongoing reactor oversight.
20 So, yes, they will take in effect.
21 MR. HAGAR: Is your question answered?
22 MR. ANDERSON: Just seems like they could 23 make it subject to -- instead of issuing a license they 24 could make them make the changes and the corrections 25
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 before the license is issued considering it's seven years 1
away. So that's my only thought.
2 MR. SAYOC: Well, we're not waiting until 3
seven years away. Those are happening right now. As 4
a matter of fact, there are orders related to the example 5
in the areas of emergency planning, seismic flooding.
6 Those are taking place right now. And Sequoyah, like 7
every other power plant across the nation, is having 8
to address these issues. So they're not waiting. It's 9
important enough of an issue to where it's not waiting 10 for license renewal. It's going on right now.
11 MR. HAGAR: You good? Okay.
12 MR. SAFER: I'm Don Safer. And can I hold 13 the microphone myself? I have two questions.
14 MR. HAGAR: Ask them one at the time, 15 please, so they can answer them.
16 MR. SAFER: I have two questions, and I will 17 ask them one at a time. But just so you know. The first 18 one bounces off a question about the Fukushima upgrades.
19 There was a fire at Browns Ferry in 1974, I believe, 20 but in the mid 70s. There were fire regulations that 21 came out of that from the NRC that were imposed. They 22 have still not been met at the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant 23 to this day.
24 So how can we have confidence that any great 25
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 rules that you may come up with around Fukushima or any 1
good rules or any rules at all will be absolutely followed 2
by TVA, because they do not have a history of compliance.
3 That's my first question. I'll take the answer.
4 MR. SAYOC: Your answer is specifically 5
fire protection I believe is the issue and with Browns 6
Ferry.
7 MR. SAFER: Compliance 8
MR. SAYOC: Right, compliance. That's 9
definitely, it's an important issue also being addressed 10 in a separate reactor oversight process for license 11 renewal. But if you have some specific concerns that 12 you feel aren't being addressed, then I would ask you 13 to come meet with one of the staff and we'll take your 14 information, the specific issues that you feel are going 15 on and you feel are a concern.
16 MR. SAFER: My question isn't about the 17 specific issues at Browns Ferry of which there are many.
18 And I'm not asking those questions right now. My point 19 is that rules were made by the Nuclear Regulatory 20 Commission and TVA 20, 30 years later -- over 30 years 21 later now, almost 40 years later has not complied.
22 Browns Ferry is under a red security safety flag, the 23 highest before they -- you all shut them down. And 24 part of that is lack of compliance with -- I don't 25
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 remember the details on that.
1 I didn't brief on that because this is about 2
Sequoyah. So I'm not talking about Browns Ferry right 3
now except to point out that just because you set a rule 4
does not mean TVA is going to comply. And we're talking 5
about decades of lack of compliance.
6 And that's bouncing off the question about 7
why aren't you waiting till after all of the Fukushima 8
information has been integrated to relicense this 9
particular plant?
10 MR. SAYOC: Well, I'd like to assure you 11 that if there are orders and rules that the NRC has input 12 in place, we have our ongoing reactor -- always have 13 processes. Matter of fact, we have Resident Inspectors 14 and routine inspections at our power plants.
15 But I will say if you have something 16 specific that we need to follow up on, either in the 17 license renewal round or in our ongoing operating 18 reactors, then I'd like to take that information. I'm 19 afraid I'm not able to speak in detail about ongoing 20 reactors.
21 MR. SAFER: Well, and there are people down 22 in Alabama that are far more familiar with all the details 23 of this that certainly have gotten with you. Again I'm 24 not trying to derail the conversation from Sequoyah to 25
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 Watts Bar because we are here to talk about Sequoyah.
1 So and believe me there has been a lot of interaction 2
on that at meetings just like this down at Browns Ferry.
3 MR. HAGAR: Let me interrupt just long 4
enough to remind you that this question and answer period 5
here is intended to answer your questions about the 6
material that's presented about the license renewal and 7
environmental scoping review for the Sequoyah Plant.
8 So let's try to keep our questions focused on that.
9 MR. SAFER: I understand. My next question 10 is about the Waste Confidence decision and how it 11 interacts and interrelates to this process. When the 12 U.S. Court threw out the NRC's Waste Confidence rule 13 and said, "No new licensing, no new relicensing until 14 the Waste Confidence issue is resolved." How can you 15 all be proceeding?
16 And it's my understanding it's going to take 17 at least two years for the Waste Confidence decision 18 to be running. And so you're saying that by 2014, which 19 is less than two years, you're going to be ready if that's 20 what -- I can't remember the exact date on the slide.
21 22 But how does the -- the question is, how 23 does the Waste Confidence problem that you are 24 encountering interact with the Sequoyah relicensing?
25
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 MR. SAYOC: You're right. What you stated 1
about the Waste Confidence rule is correct about the 2
U.S. Court of Appeals basically requiring the Commission 3
to come up with a revised Waste Confidence rule and in 4
the interim no licenses will be renewed. And so that 5
does have a major impact upon Sequoyah's license renewal.
6 And until the Waste Confidence rule has been finalized 7
and approved, then only at that point will Sequoyah or 8
any other license renewal that we're working on will 9
we even recommend or, yeah, recommend license renewal.
10 11 I think the dates that you were referring 12 to was probably the February 2014. What I wonder -- yes, 13 what I'd like to point out is all that says is -- well, 14 let me back up. The Commission while during this two 15 year process or roughly two year process while we're 16 working on the Waste Confidence Rule, the Commission 17 has allowed our review to continue.
18 And all this is is in preparation for 19 the -- to gather all the information to finalize our 20 Environmental Impact Statement so then the Commission 21 can make a ruling on it. But again no licensing decision 22 will be made.
23 I think the date that you were referring 24 to all that is the publication of the Draft Environmental 25
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 Impact Statement 2014. And again even up to the Final 1
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, all that 2
is is a -- is a conclusion of the staff's review.
3 But there's no licensing action in this 4
process. It happens after the Environmental -- the 5
Final Environmental Impact Statement and EPA reviews 6
our findings and the Commission -- the Commission and 7
then the EPA reviews our findings. Then and only at 8
that point does a decision on license renewal take place 9
after the Waste Confidence rule has been settled.
10 MR. HAGAR: Did that answer your question?
11 (No audible response.)
12 Another question?
13 MS. FERRIS: And I would like to address 14 this to anybody who is here from the NRC. Has the 15 NRC -- we know that Browns Ferry, as terrible as its 16 record was, was renewed for 20 more years. And I think 17 it's 2036 or something like that before it expires.
18 And I want to know whether the NRC has ever 19 turned down an application for license renewal from a 20 nuclear reactor plant?
21 MR. SAYOC: Yes, there definitely have been 22 situations and maybe I can ask one of my colleagues.
23 But I know that there have been examples, Beaver Valley's 24 license renewal application. That was returned for 25
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 further information.
1 Were there any other examples?
2 MR. WRONA: This is David Wrona; I'm a 3
Branch Chief in the Division of License Renewal in the 4
NRC.
5 MS. HARRIS: Say that again.
6 MR. WRONA: I'm a Branch Chief in the 7
Division of License Renewal with the NRC. I oversee 8
the Environmental Project Managers.
9 MS. HARRIS: Are you Region II?
10 MR. RONALD: I'm out of our Headquarters 11 office.
12 MS. HARRIS: Okay.
13 MR. RONALD: The Beaver Valley License 14 Renewal Application was submitted to us and during our 15 acceptance review, we determined that it wasn't up to 16 our standards and we had returned it to them.
17 Subsequently they corrected all the errors that were 18 in their application, resubmitted it, and it was 19 reviewed.
20 We have several license renewal 21 applications going through our process right now where 22 there are some technical issues that the staff has 23 identified during the review. And those reviews are 24 on hold until those issues are addressed. We give the 25
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 applicants the opportunity to address the issues and 1
correct the deficiencies that we identify. When they 2
chose to do so and make the application acceptable to 3
our standards, then we would in this case determine if 4
the review was completed and acceptable to our standard.
5 6
So in the cases with all the applications 7
before us, expect for a couple that we have on hold right 8
now, the applicants have been able to meet our standards 9
and we have approved the extensions of their licenses.
10 11 MR. HAGAR: Did that answer your questions?
12 13 MS. HARRIS: (Inaudible) 14 MR. WRONA: Well, we currently have license 15 renewals that are on hold because they're not meeting 16 our standards. But we have not approved those. We give 17 them the opportunity to correct their applications, 18 bring them up to our standards, and in most cases they've 19 done that and we've approved the licenses.
20 MS. FERRIS: Am I to understand that there 21 never has been a nuclear reactor application turned down 22 by the NRC? I don't mean returned for a revision. I 23 mean turned down saying, "No, you cannot renew this 24 license for another 20 years."
25
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 MR. WRONA: To date none have denied.
1 There are several that are currently on hold because 2
they have not shown to meet our standards.
3 MR. HAGAR: Any other questions about the 4
material? Yes.
5 MR. GREEN: I'm Jimmy Green. I'm with the 6
Southern Alliance for Clean Energy. Let's just to 7
clarify that last point. The way I understand it then, 8
the question before us today is not whether or not this 9
license will be renewed, it's what steps have to be taken 10 to make sure the license is renewed?
11 MR. WRONA: Well, let me clarify that.
12 What I said and what I think the other presenters said 13 is the purpose of this meeting is to obtain your input 14 to the scope -- to the Environmental Scoping Process.
15 What issues do you identify that the NRC should consider 16 in the Scoping Review? That's the purpose of this 17 meeting.
18 MR. GREEN: Well, the final outcome is 19 eventually going to be approval of this license 20 application?
21 MR. WRONA: Yes.
22 MR. HAGAR: Well, that's the process 23 they're in. We can't answer that.
24 MR. WRONA: If they meet our standards and 25
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 everything's acceptable, we would approve a license 1
renewal application. If they can't meet our standards, 2
we would not approve license renewal application.
3 MR. PADDOCK: This is Brian Paddock. I'd 4
like a little more clarification on the relationship 5
of this SEIS process and any finding that it ultimately 6
makes with respect to Waste Confidence. I understand 7
that no license will be issued. The Commission has 8
ordered that no license or relicense be issued until 9
there's a Waste Confidence regulation back in place.
10 Now of course with litigation, we don't know how long 11 that may be.
12 But can or will this SEIS make any kind of 13 a determination on the environmental impact of the 14 retention and disposition of waste from continued 15 operation of this reactor even though there is neither 16 a final EIS nor a final Waste Confidence decision at 17 the time that you propose in September of 2014 to issue 18 your SEIS?
19 MR. SAYOC: So sort of the same question?
20 You're wanting to find out whether the issuance of our 21 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, whether 22 or not that will address the Waste Confidence or the 23 disposal of waste?
24 MR. PADDOCK: Well, it's my feeling that 25
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 as an Environmental Impact Statement Supplemental that 1
it needs to discuss what's going to happen with 20 more 2
years of waste. I'm just wondering how that can be 3
handled if we don't have a final Waste Confidence 4
decision?
5 MR. SAYOC: Right. Yes, the disposal of 6
waste that you're talking is being addressed by the 7
Commission. They've decided to -- or they thought it 8
best to address a generic case as it is common to all 9
nuclear power plants. And so a separate Environmental 10 Impact Statement will specifically address that. Now 11 the Sequoyah License Renewal associated Environmental 12 Impact Statement will address that as well on a more 13 onsite specific basis as far as the waste at Sequoyah.
14 And it will rely heavily upon the Environmental Impact 15 Statement that's being analyzed for generically for 16 waste disposal.
17 MR. PADDOCK: And I guess my question would 18 be if that generic EIS for Waste Confidence, which would 19 be the precursor of a regulation, if that's not ready 20 by your September 2014 target date for this EIS to 21 be -- SEIS to be released, what happens then?
22 MR. SAYOC: Then the license renewal 23 decision will be delayed pending the Waste Confidence 24 ruling. The SEIS will be issued and more than likely 25
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 what will happen is, if the SEIS is issued and the Waste 1
Confidence EIS comes out after that, prior to issuing 2
any licenses, the in-house applications will be reviewed 3
for any new and significant information and will take 4
into consideration -- will definitely take into 5
consideration what the Generic Environmental Impact 6
Statement, specifically the Waste Confidence, what were 7
the findings there. Are there any new and significant 8
information to Sequoyah?
9 And then at that point, a supplement or a 10 review of new and significant information will be 11 conducted. If Sequoyah's review is done first and then 12 the Generic Waste Confidence Environmental Impact 13 Statement.
14 So then it'll all be addressed before or 15 after, but it definitely will be addressed before 16 issuance of a -- or before the renewal of a license 17 decision is made.
18 MR. PADDOCK: Thank you.
19 MR. HAGAR: You good? Okay.
20 MR. ANDERSON: How does the Generic EIS 21 study the health effects of low doses and medium doses 22 and high dose radiation on the population specific to 23 Sequoyah? Is there a team on the ground that 24 does -- comes and does studies and says, "Hey, how much 25
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 is the cancer rate here? And could it have been caused 1
by additional radiation?" Or is it part of the 1998 2
generic study?
3 So I just want to know is there actually 4
a team here? Or do you use the data from 1998 to 5
determine your findings?
6 MR. SAYOC: We have a health physicist, 7
subject matter experts that review current data that 8
are new and significant to Sequoyah. As matter of fact, 9
it will be onsite next week for an onsite inspection 10 or review of information documentation. So we conduct 11 our thorough and independent review. We take generic 12 issues that are in the guise. And we supplement that.
13 We try to look at new and significant information and 14 health physics. And radiological impacts in human 15 health is one of the major issues that we look at.
16 MR. ANDERSON: So when you say thorough, 17 that means that you talked to five people, 100 people, 18 10,000 people? You do studies? I mean what's thorough?
19 MR. SAYOC: Thorough to me is you look at 20 all the information out there that's available. We take 21 your comments. And if you are -- I'm not a health 22 physicist myself. But if you have specific concerns 23 or want to know more specifically how the review is 24 conducted as far as radiological impacts to health and 25
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 human and health physics, I can definitely take your 1
name and information and refer you to our subject matter 2
experts in that area.
3 MR. HAGAR: You good?
4 Any other questions about the material 5
that's presented? All right, then thank you, Manny.
6 I think that moves us to the third part of 7
our meeting. And this is when you get the opportunity 8
to say what you want to say about the license renewal 9
process. And for this evening's meeting we have eight 10 people sign up. And by my watch we've got about 65 11 minutes left in the scheduled meeting period. That 12 averages out to just about eight minutes per person.
13 And so I will invite you to -- I'm sorry, 14 Gerri, got one more?
15 Okay, do the math guys. That's nine in 16 about 54 minutes. About six minutes a person. So I'll 17 call you up here. You'll have six minutes to say what 18 you need to say. And then I'll ask you to turn the 19 microphone over to the next person.
20 And let me suggest, though, if you're going 21 to quote from a document, if you're going to come up 22 and quote from a document, rather than quote from the 23 document, just identify the document. Because I know 24 from experience the NRC staff will pull that document 25
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 and validate those quotes. So don't spend a lot of time 1
quoting from a document, just give the document. Just 2
a hint to you.
3 All right, Jimmy Green will be the first 4
speaker. And then Garry Morgan will follow that.
5 And Jimmy, you'll have -- what did we say, 6
six minutes?
7 MR. GREEN: Hello, I am Jimmy Green. I am 8
the Energy Policy Manager at the Southern Alliance for 9
Clean Energy in Knoxville, Tennessee. We are a regional 10 non-profit conservation and energy consumer 11 organization with members in Tennessee and throughout 12 the Southeast. We focus on energy policy, including 13 nuclear issues since 1985. I'd like to thank you for 14 holding these public hearings today.
15 The main point I want to make is we wanted 16 to make sure that the NRC is aware that TVA is beginning 17 to enter into the process of developing an updated, 18 integrated resource plan. Probably at the end of this 19 year they're going to get started seriously on that.
20 This will inform the question of whether or not the power 21 generated by this plant is needed.
22 And so we would recommend that you closely 23 follow the IRP process of TVA to see how that calculation 24 plays out. Clearly not using this energy is going to 25
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 be the most efficient way to go and the least 1
environmental impact. And that's the thing we're always 2
recommending, energy efficiency and renewable energy 3
as a clean and preferred alternative.
There's 4
some other environmental issues I just wanted to mention 5
that are tied specifically to the Sequoyah Plant. One 6
is the water requirements. That's been a big issue 7
recently, the amount of water that these plants take 8
in and the temperature rise. I'm sure you're looking 9
at that.
10 Vulnerability to flooding obviously has 11 been in the news recently and still seems to be an issue 12 that hasn't been resolved. Well, I guess technically 13 it has been revolved but not in your favor.
14 So the ice condenser design is a problem.
15 And the fact that I'm not sure how this is 16 going to play into it, but the Sequoyah Plant has been 17 mentioned as a possible producer of tritium and it has 18 also been mentioned as a possible plant -- the 19 possibility to use the Sequoyah Plant to burn MOX fuel, 20 the mixed oxide fuel. I think Browns Ferry was the first 21 choice, but Sequoyah was mentioned on that, too. So 22 when you go into this Environmental Impact thing, I think 23 that's something you really have to take into account, 24 the possible use of MOX fuel in this thing.
25
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 And that's about all I have. Thank you.
1 MR. HAGAR: All right, thank you. Garry 2
Morgan will be next and then Tim Anderson will follow 3
Gary.
4 MR. MORGAN: My name is Garry Morgan. I 5
am from Scottsboro, Alabama. I'm here representing the 6
Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League. You might say, 7
well, what's this guy down river a hundred miles 8
concerned about up here at Sequoyah?
9 Well, the one factor other than the air we 10 breathe and maybe the relatives that we may have that 11 connects us all is the river back over here. What 12 happens up river affects the folks down river, whether 13 it be a nuclear power plant or a coal fired facility 14 or dumping in that river.
15 I want to talk to you a little bit today, 16 not necessarily about the river, but about emergency 17 planning and evacuation zones. One of the lessons from 18 Fukushima was the discovery that, "Hey, radiation just 19 does not stay within -- when there is a catastrophic 20 failure of a system such as occurred at Fukushima, which 21 has occurred at Three Mile Island, which occurred at 22 Chernobyl, and the many near misses which has occurred 23 within the United States. And that radiation gets out 24 of that containment, it doesn't say, "Oh, lookie here.
25
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 Here's that 10-mile zone." No, it don't do that. It 1
goes where the wind blows it.
2 And in Fukushima we learned that may be a 3
120 miles downwind. It may be 160 miles downwind. That 4
is a concern. And this is the reason one of the lessons 5
of Fukushima was consider the EPZs, the Emergency 6
Planning Zones, the Emergency Evacuation Zones.
7 Currently the TVA sends out and NRC approves 8
these Emergency Evacuation Zones. And this is critical.
9 There is nothing more critical in the environment than 10 us, the people. We are the most critical. We are.
11 I have a background in the military in 12 nuclear assurity and personal liability. We talk about 13 nuclear assurity and personal liability, we always talk 14 about a pyramid. And the bottom of that pyramid and 15 all things nuclear is the people. This community and 16 the surrounding communities, at Sequoyah or any nuclear 17 plant is the people that support that pyramid.
18 You got Resident Inspectors here. And I'm 19 sure they do not want to see TVA employees, NRC employees 20 that work here, plus the citizens, the good police that's 21 here, the mayor, the City Council, everybody, the 22 citizens of the community. Nobody wants to see a serious 23 accident. But Lord forbid if that accident does occur, 24 you want to be ready for it.
And one of the 25
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 lessons of Fukushima has came out and has been very 1
latently (sic) we are not ready. And I'm talking about 2
we as Americans. And the regulator, the power 3
providers, we're not ready to deal with that unexpected 4
accident. Because in our emergency planning, we tell 5
them radionuclides, "Oh, you can't go out of this 10-mile 6
zone." Well, ladies and gentlemen, I'm here to tell 7
you it just don't work that way.
8 I am asking the NRC before they go forward 9
with any relicensing, whether it be Sequoyah or anybody 10 else, you better make improvements. I highly suggest 11 you make improvements on your emergency planning and 12 your emergency evacuation zones. It is required. And 13 this is being considered in the various tiers of the 14 Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Please include is as 15 a high priority at Sequoyah.
16 We don't like to think about the 17 unthinkable. And we know that everybody does the best 18 job that they can to ensure that that nuclear reactor 19 over across the ridge over there next to the river is 20 very safe. But if that unthinkable does happen, you 21 want to be prepared. You want to be ready for it.
22 The emergency planning zones, the emergency 23 evacuation zones, 10 miles is not sufficient. Fukushima 24 has shown this. Other accidents have shown this. The 25
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 NRC's own planning has shown this. The weather shows 1
it. And climate change is very important factor.
2 Extend the 10 miles zones out to 25, the 3
food intake zone which is currently 50 needs to be 4
extended out to a 100 miles. You need to train. You 5
need to plan and be ready for that unforeseen accident.
6 Defense in depth, good program. The other programs 7
that the NRC ensures that the power providers implement, 8
good program.
9 But if you're not ready for that unforeseen 10 accident, that which you cannot fathom in your minds, 11 then you're going to kill people. And nobody in this 12 room wants to see that happen. Be prepared, think 13 about -- NRC, please, think about extending the Emergency 14 Planning Zones and the Emergency Preparedness Zones in 15 this community.
16 And that includes, of course, I was reading 17 in documents where the NRC passes out the potassium 18 iodine. Down in Chattanooga, NRC passed potassium 19 iodine since you're 15 miles away. No, you only think 20 about that 10 mile zone. Think about outside that zone.
21 22 I mean if you think about where you're going 23 to get help right here? The local police and local fire 24 are going to be very busy. That's where they're going 25
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 to get help is through their neighbors. Because I know 1
that all communities in the Tennessee Valley have 2
reciprocity agreements where they can call in for extra 3
help. But if you don't plan, if you don't bring in 4
Chattanooga, if you don't bring in the other areas over 5
to the west into this area, then you're failing in your 6
planning. That is something I have noticed.
7 Many years in the military has shown me, 8
has demonstrated that one of the greatest -- and 9
Fukushima showed that one of the greatest failures is 10 the failure to plan adequately for emergency. I ask 11 you to pay specific attention to the EPZ and Emergency 12 Preparedness.
13 Thank you.
14 MR HAGAR: Tim Anderson is our next speaker 15 and Sandy Kurtz will follow Tim.
16 TIM ANDERSON: Hello, my name is Tim 17 Anderson. I'm from Chattanooga, Tennessee. I'm here 18 today for Docket ID NRC-2013-0037. The citizens of the 19 United States have a right under the National 20 Environmental Protection Act of 1969 to request that 21 the Generic Environmental Impact Statement be thrown 22 out and a third party comprehensive risk analysis that 23 takes all elements at such risks to the community, to 24 our commerce, to the environment into account. A report 25
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 that truly defines the human health effects of low dose 1
exposures and mental stress to the population for living 2
under such risks.
3 What are the true effects of cancer causing 4
agents reaching into our environment?
5 What are the true impacts of increased 6
permanent storage or production of high level nuclear 7
waste? Due to the permanent storage issue this proposed 8
action should be considered a major federal action and, 9
therefore, require a new Environmental Impact Statement 10 under Section 102 42 USC 4332.
11
- NEPA, the Environmental Quality 12 Improvement Act of 1970, has amended Section 42 USC 4371 13 and Section 309 of the Clean Air Act as amended under 14 42 USC 7609, and we hereby request the study.
15 Also any study under these rules should also 16 include a comprehensive study to determine if there is 17 this speculative energy demand and whether it could be 18 met through other sources that are now viable, including 19 renewable energy.
20 And the answer to that is, yes, we can, and, 21 no, we don't have a true need to build more reactors 22 and can certainly phase out these 25 mile evac zones 23 over the next decade.
24 Maybe the decision needs to be postponed 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 53 for five years to reassess the needs and the dangers 1
based upon real time, up-to-date health studies. In 2
any event, I'm sure it's the goal of the Agency to move 3
forward.
4 We would ask that any study include the 5
long-term health effects of low, mid, and high level 6
radiation on the surrounding community and the health 7
effects on humans, born and unborn, and the effects on 8
human and the environment now and in the future.
9 In addition, any action by the federal 10 agency requiring a large burden on the area of water 11 supply should provide a comprehensive study as to the 12 effects of the massive water usage, including the effects 13 to marine and human life associated with scheduled 14 releases of various radioactive isotopes and proposed 15 average water temperature increases on the surrounding 16 water supplies and how that relates back to human 17 consumption, rights, and long-term environment impacts.
18 We also ask that the Commission include the 19 following internationally recognized study as a basis 20 for any comprehensive human health impact studies.
21 These reports show a positive link between increased 22 cancer rates and the release of low, mid, and high level 23 releases.
24 There are many studies regarding the fallout of Chernobyl 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 54 and the true effects to the population that are not being 1
considered. These reports even by the most conservative 2
estimates state that over one million additional cancer 3
cases have been attributed to that disaster.
4 And the studies that should be included are 5
the American Academy of Sciences 2008 Biological Effects 6
of Ionizing Radiation reports there's no safe level of 7
radiation.
8 European Committee on Radiation Risk argues 9
that the existing risk model used by the NRC does not 10 take internal exposure into account. High rates of 11 internal exposure will mean a dramatic increase in cancer 12 risks for Fukushima residents with as many as 400,000 13 additional cases predicted by this model by 2061.
14 The Office of Science and Financial 15 Assistance Program Notice 9914, Low Dose Radiation, 16 says, "Each unit of radiation, no matter how small, can 17 cause cancer."
18 The German Federal Office of Radiation 19 Protection titled Epidemiology Study of Childhood Cancer 20 in the Vicinity of Nuclear Power Plants shows a causative 21 link to young children developing cancer more frequently 22 when they live near nuclear power plants.
23 The American Cancer Society states that 24 ionizing radiation is a proven human carcinogen. And 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 55 they go on to say that people living near or down-wind 1
of a plant are known as down-winders.
2 Any EIS should include a comprehensive 3
study as to the effects on the citizens and the commerce 4
and the environment of having onsite storage, above 5
ground storage of high level nuclear waste.
6 Specifically the dangers of such storage and the fact 7
that the storage site is already three times its designed 8
capacity.
9 TVA also does not have adequate insurance 10 to cover a major event. Nor is there a public procedure 11 in place on how local and regional business will be 12 compensated for loss of business related income, 13 relocation of businesses, residents, loss of personal 14 items, homes, and cost of relocation.
15 How does TVA propose to relocate an entire 16 city in the event of a major event? How do they plan 17 on paying for a complete economic shutdown of the evac 18 zone?
19 These are the risks we as citizens in the 20 effected region have to burden so that the TVA can 21 continue to generate energy through nuclear reactors.
22 The world thinks -- we don't have these 23 risks with solar energy or other viable renewable energy 24 forms.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 56 Where do I go when I can't go home? Where 1
do I go when my bank is closed? Who notifies the elderly 2
and disabled that they need to get out of the area?
3 Where's your plan and where's your money?
4 The World Bank projects that the evacuation 5
of the 19 mile radius implemented by the Japanese 6
government cost 225 billion dollars.
7 Please take these into consideration.
8 Thanks.
9 MR. HAGAR: Sandy Kurtz, you're up and 10 following Sandy will be Don Safer.
11 MS. KURTZ: Hi, everyone. I spoke earlier 12 today and I just want to summarize some of those 13 statements that I made so for those who weren't at the 14 earlier session might hear all of our concerns -- a very 15 long list of people.
16 By the way, I'm with Bellefonte Efficiency 17 and Sustainability Team and Mothers Against Tennessee 18 River Radiation. We have a table outside, so if you 19 want to pick up some information after this, feel free 20 to stop by there.
21 We -- I talked about -- you've heard 22 something about the flooding, the flooding concerns, 23 the flooding mitigation concerns, possibility of an 24 earthquake, climate disruption patterns which should 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 57 be updated. We were concerned about that.
1 The idea that tritium is being made because 2
of the Department of Energy's request so they can take 3
that tritium to boost the making of their bombs in a 4
commercial nuclear facility. Which the line between 5
military and commercial nuclear facilities is getting 6
really, really fuzzy. The radioactive mix oxide fuel 7
use, also experimental, that's a problem.
8 And the crowding of the radioactive fuel 9
rods and the so called spent fuel pool which is actually 10 a higher end radiation than when it started out in the 11 reactor -- when the rod started out in the reactor.
12 That is a concern and we would advocate for moving those, 13 the used fuel rods, after they cool and it takes about 14 five years for them to cool. To remove those and put 15 them in hardened cask waste cask storage. This 16 radioactive trash doesn't need to be in the pools where 17 it actually has more chance of exploding.
18 I talked about the alternatives that were 19 offered by TVA's draft EIS here. Application talking 20 about two alternatives, none of which mentioned the 21 alternative of just shutting it down. That would be 22 an alternative that would be -- we think would be good.
23 And the idea that we don't need to replace that energy 24 or that it could be replaced with solar alternative or 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 58 other alternative energies.
1 I wanted to talk a little bit here though 2
about radiation doses. Apparently it seems that the 3
statement that the public will continue at current levels 4
associated with normal operations and that these doses 5
also for the occupational doses to employees are going 6
to remain the same when the license is renewed. So we 7
don't need to worry about that, but these doses are all 8
well below the regulatory limits, they say. And so we 9
don't need to worry.
10 Another 20 years of this is not good because 11 in fact no dose of radiation is safe and it's cumulative.
12 So the additional time there is going to continue to 13 expose us citizens in a growing population, urban 14 population, with more and more of this radiation that 15 is emitted on a daily basis from a nuclear power plant.
16 17 The thing that happens is those daily 18 radiation doses levels that they recommend seem to go 19 up if there is more in the air and then they call it 20 background radiation. But at Fukushima that's what 21 happened. When the accident happened, suddenly the 22 people that were supposedly not supposed to receive a 23 dose at a certain level, suddenly it was okay for those 24 people to receive a higher level and that was the standard 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 59 that they set.
1 So the radiation standard seemed to change 2
depending on how much is actually in the air. And our 3
radiation background -- so called background level -- has 4
been rising over these years. So it is cumulative.
5 There is cancer risks even without the accident.
6 And I think the other thing is that the 7
radiation standard -- and maybe NRC can look at this 8
in overall -- the standard for how much dosage you could 9
get is based on a what they call, the Reference Man.
10 And the Reference Man is a German white male, about five 11 foot nine and -- five foot four and 150, 170 pounds, 12 something like that.
13 Anybody qualify here?
14 The truth is that the studies now show that 15 it is women and infants and fetuses that are more subject 16 to radiation dose and cancer events.
17 So the problem is that the standard 18 themselves are not right. And I think that really needs 19 to be looked at.
20 The other thing that I wanted to emphasize 21 here was that with the numerous accidents, scrams, 22 shutdowns, leaks, dishonesty, and equipment monitoring, 23 lack of proper reports filed, ignoring safety 24 procedures, poor nuclear employee education as Browns 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 60 Ferry fire thing, and the installation of non-certified 1
equipment parts, we learned of just the other day, does 2
not assure the public that TVA can properly run their 3
nuclear plants.
4 And that and ice condenser technology, we 5
should not renew the license.
6 MR. HAGAR: Thank you.
7 Don Safer. And Kathleen Ferris will follow 8
Don.
9 MR. SAFER: I spoke at length on the record 10 this afternoon, but I appreciate the opportunity to speak 11 again.
12 I'm from Nashville. And so I'll briefly go over some 13 things for the benefit of those that were not here this 14 afternoon, recognizing it will be repetitive for this 15 process.
16 The plant safety issues do not take into 17 the effects -- take into account the effects of serious 18 accidents that's beyond design basic accidents. And 19 they just reject considering those out of hand in all 20 of the Environmental Impact Statements. So it never 21 gets considered what the possibility is in terms of a 22 massive release of radiation. That's not part of this 23 process. It's specifically excluded because it's said 24 to be so unlikely as to happen, but we've already seen 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 61 it happen twice in our lifetimes.
The lack of 1
need, just this last year 2012, over 13,000 megawatts 2
of wind power was put in place in the United States.
3 It required no scoping hearings about massive releases 4
of radiation. That's 13 nuclear power plants the size 5
of Sequoyah that have gone online in the U.S.
6 TVA has a proposal in front of them today 7
for 3,500 megawatts of wind power to be brought in from 8
Oklahoma by a private company on a direct current line 9
through Arkansas and put into the TVA grid in Memphis 10 to be used. That's 3,500 megawatts. That's both 11 Sequoyah Plant and the Gallatin Steam Plant. That's 12 just scratching the surface of what wind can do.
13 Solar energy is -- TVA is putting the brakes 14 on solar every way that it can in every possible 15 situation. Just look it up. There's a budding solar 16 energy industry in the Valley. A lot of jobs, a lot 17 of installers, it's jobs that can't be exported. It's 18 jobs that will continue. And the people who have put 19 solar on their roofs have guaranteed what their cost 20 is going to be for 30 years. TVA needs to encourage 21 that instead of this license renewal.
22 The age factors, when these plants were 23 built and designed, they were designed for a 30 year 24 life and then they went to 40 and now it's 60. It's 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 62 rewriting history to say these can go safely on and on 1
and on.
2 The decommissioning hasn't been talked 3
about. There's a plant in Illinois that's going to cost 4
a billion dollars at least to decommission, the Zion 5
Nuclear Plant in Illinois.
6 TVA has about a billion or less in its 7
decommissioning fund, but they have six reactors to be 8
decommissioned at this point. There's not money for 9
decommissioning.
10 I would submit to the people of this 11 Soddy-Daisy area that you should get in line first and 12 start the decommissioning process while there is still 13 money in that fund because once that first billion is 14 spent I don't know where the money is going to come from.
15 And we've all seen the problems that the federal 16 government has with funding, sequestration, everything 17 else. So if you have confidence in 2040 that there's 18 going to be money to decommission, then you're living 19 in a different world than the one I see.
20 Flooding -- I'm from Nashville. Two years 21 ago we had a flood. I think it was two years ago, or 22 maybe now it's three, I'm sorry. We had a flood, 500 23 or 1,000 year flood. It was simply unbelievable. We 24 had 17 inches of rain over a two-day period. Little 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 63 bitty streams were flooding people out of their homes, 1
washing homes off their foundations. The Corp of 2
Engineers lost vehicles next to the dam they operate 3
in Cheatham County, the Cheatham Dam below Nashville 4
and the Cumberland River.
5 The Old Hickory Dam, which is the one 6
directly above Nashville on the Cumberland River, had 7
to be opened wide open and that's why downtown Nashville 8
flooded because that dam was in danger of being 9
overtopped. Had it been overtopped, the dam would have 10 been washed away. It was not designed to be overtopped.
11 12 If that type of rain event had happened 13 here, I believe Sequoyah would be in great danger. There 14 is nobody that dreamt that much rain was possible in 15 that short of a time.
16 I encourage you all at the NRC to take into 17 account some of the types of floods we've had like that.
18 That Nashville flood is not the only one that has 19 happened. These rain storms come in and they sit in 20 one area and they just dump and dump and dump.
21 Please, take into account not just dam 22 failure but a rain event of 17 or more inches in a 24 23 or 48 hour5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> period. It simply will overwhelm and that's 24 the type of thing -- you can't have a tsunami here, but 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 64 you could sure have a flood of that sort.
1 And believe me, the first responders in this 2
community are going to be hard-pressed getting people 3
out of their homes and rescuing people from the highways.
4 We even had one policeman that was washed downstream, 5
who was trying to stop people from going on a flooded 6
street, West End Avenue, one of the major streets in 7
Nashville in Belle Meade, a high-class neighborhood.
8 So flooding is not to be taken lightly in this day and 9
age.
10 I think I'll save the rest of my time to 11 those who have not spoken before, but I thank you for 12 the opportunity.
13 MR. HAGAR: Okay, Kathleen Ferris, you're 14 next and then Brian Paddock will be the next speaker.
15 KATHLEEN FERRIS: My name is Kathleen 16 Ferris and I'm from Murfreesboro, Tennessee. I'm 17 cofounder of a group called Citizens to End Nuclear 18 Dumping in Tennessee. But I speak here today as a mother 19 and as a grandmother.
20 I'm asking those of you who are scientists -- mostly 21 physics and chemistry I suppose are your fields of 22 expertise -- to consider this renewal, license renewal, 23 in terms of biological perspective.
24 For decades the public has been warned by 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 65 physicians and public health officials of the dangers 1
of ionizing radiation. And people like Doctor Helen 2
Caldecott and Doctor Samuel Epstein are continuing to 3
warn us of the dangers.
4 We know that it causes changes in DNA that 5
cause mutations. We know that it is carcinogenic and 6
especially for children. And I suppose as a 7
grandmother, the children are one of my main concerns.
8 I've got two little daughters who live near 9
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and they are surrounded by 10 nuclear reactors. So the things I've learned about 11 cancer really are close to my heart.
12 It doesn't take a major accident for 13 reactors to emit radiation. There are routine emissions 14 that are required just to operate them safely, safer, 15 more safely. There are spills. There are accidents 16 and every time there are these -- not catastrophic, but 17 sometimes very close to catastrophic -- events, TVA and 18 NRC reassure the public there's no danger. There's no 19 risk to the public. I don't know how many times I've 20 read that on the NRC website.
21 What these reactors are doing is polluting 22 the environment. They pollute the water. They pollute 23 the air. When rain falls through polluted air, the 24 radiation is washed down into the ground. The plants 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 66 become radioactive. The cows eat the plants. The 1
radioactive iodine goes into the cows' milk. The 2
children drink the milk. It is not safe. This 3
radiation is getting into our food chain. And since 4
we eat lots of meat at the top of the food chain, we're 5
getting a lot of radiation just without the catastrophic 6
event.
7 Now there are several studies, as Mr.
8 Anderson pointed out. There was one back in the 1980's 9
in Sellafield, England that showed that clusters of 10 cancers and leukemia. More recently around 2010, the 11 Germany government sponsored a study of the reactors 12 in Germany and they found for children under five years 13 old they had more than doubled the incidents of leukemia 14 and almost double for other types of cancer. Another 15 study more recent from that is from Chepstow in Wales.
16 They found that children were at three and one-half 17 times the risk if they lived close to a nuclear reactor 18 as the national average.
19 Now these are instances of cancers close 20 to the nuclear reactors, but there's another study that 21 came out; just last week it was released. It's from 22 California, Sacramento County, which has a population 23 of 1.4 million.
24 Rancho Seco Reactor closed over 23 years ago and some 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 67 scientists have been going through the cancer registry 1
for California trying to determine what has happened 2
to the cancer rate. They used the last two months of 3
the reactor's operation and then they've been studying 4
what's been happening in the intervening 20 years.
5 And what they found is that a very 6
considerable drop in the cancer incidents since that 7
time. They have found 4,319 fewer cancer cases over 8
a 20 year period. That's more people than died in the 9
Twin Towers. And of the people who are most effected 10 are women, Hispanics, and children.
11 An NAC study -- there is a National Academy 12 of Science study being sponsored by the NRC right now 13 to try to determine what the cancer incidence is around 14 nuclear reactors. And of that study which is continuing 15 now -- I'm sorry, I've lost my train of thought -- okay, 16 that study is not yet completed. And it probably won't 17 be for several years.
18 So in addition to other questions asked 19 about the timing for this relicensing, my question is 20 why not wait until that study is in to determine whether 21 we should be relicensing aging reactors.
22 There are 134,000 people who live only in 23 Hamilton County and probably approximately a million 24 in a five-mile radius -- 50-mile radius. I would urge 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 68 you for the sake of those children not to renew this 1
license and to protect the people who live here.
2 Thank you.
3 MR. HAGAR: Brian Paddock. And following 4
Brian will be Ann Harris.
5 Is that right? Ann Harris?
6 MS. HARRIS: Yes.
7 MR. HAGAR: Okay, good.
8 MS. JOHNSTON: Bob, I would like to offer 9
my time to Brian and Ann. They were not here for the 10 earlier session to speak.
11 MR. HAGAR: Well, there's three more 12 speakers to speak.
13 Gretel, you're the last person that signed 14 up?
15 MS. JOHNSTON: Yes.
16 MR. HAGAR: All right, I think we can do 17 that.
18 MR. PADDOCK: I'll take an extra minute.
19 MR. HAGAR: You'll each have nine minutes 20 a piece.
21 MS. FERRIS: Thank you, Bob.
22 MR. HAGAR: You're welcome.
23 MR. PADDOCK: And I feel so blessed not to 24 have to follow Ann, which is a very hard act to follow.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 69 My name is Brian Paddock. I'm an attorney.
1 I happen to also be the Tennessee Local Counsel for 2
a Challenge to the Environmental Impact Statement for 3
the Watch Bar 2 Unit, which is still under construction 4
and for which there are still legal contentions pending 5
as to the impact on water temperature and aquatic 6
resources.
7 I suggest that the NRC staff take a close 8
look at this because all of the aquatic impacts 9
heretofore in the licensing of these reactors was done, 10 based on modeling and not based on any real world 11 measurements. Since then TVA has gone back and done 12 a considerable amount of real world biological 13 assessment and quite frankly, they have done a pretty 14 good job of it.
15 And you might look at what they've done in 16 terms of dealing with the Watts Bar 2 litigation contest 17 and see if you don't think they need to do the same thing 18 with respect to the impacts of the cooling water and 19 resulting hot water from the plants under consideration 20 here.
21 I cheer the legal committee for the 22 Tennessee Chapter of the Sierra Club. I was a Sierra 23 Club representative to the last integrated resource 24 plan, stake holder group. I've spent more than 14 full 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 70 days in meetings with TVA staff, with many other stake 1
holders, including industrial users and so on. So I'm 2
fairly familiar with TVA's pattern of generation 3
activities.
4 I've also attended many NRC hearings, in 5
particular those where the NRC comes down and talks to 6
TVA about things, including whether it's ever going to 7
be able to finish the Watts Bar 2 Plant and what went 8
wrong there.
9 I have a very direct personal interest 10 because while I'm now living in Jackson County, I do 11 own a condominium on Manufacturers Road south of here.
12 And that's where my wife and I intend to retire. I'm 13 not sure what that means; it probably means a 14 continuation of not getting paid. And also having my 15 grandchildren visit me there.
16 First, I would call to your attention -- and 17 I think this has was raised in the questions. We 18 seriously challenge that the assumptions in the Generic 19 EIS are still valid. I think many of them are out of 20 date and I was glad to hear that the GEIS is being 21 revisited. It's not clear to me how that fits in and 22 how well that will be done to provide, in fact, an 23 adequate foundation for the SEIS. And if the GEIS is 24 still in ferment or is out of date, building an SEIS 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 71 on a site specific basis on top of it, it seems to me, 1
is legally questionable under the National Environmental 2
Policy Act.
3 And quite frankly, we have to express some 4
discomfort with confidence in the NRC. For example, 5
recently there was a discussion of the venting that 6
needed to be available in post Fukushima circumstances.
7 And the Commissioners voted to say, yes, the staff 8
should go ahead and prepare a regulation to require 9
vents, but it would not require the filtration of 10 radioactive materials through those vents.
11 In other words, the vents will be -- if the 12 regulation is finally adopted and if the operators 13 finally install those vents, the current policy posture 14 of the Commissioners is that they will not be required 15 to filter radioactives out of that, and thus, you are 16 going to permit -- obviously, in very unusual 17 circumstances, the release of radiation. So you might 18 look which way the wind is blowing where you live from 19 this plant.
20 NEPA requires a hard look and that's a very 21 interesting test for a lawyer. What's a hard look?
22 And I've read hundreds of NEPA cases and 23 it varies, but it does not appear here that there has 24 been or so far an active consideration of what would 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 72 be called the no action option which would be not to 1
issue a license extension and to put the plant into a 2
posture where it would be decommissioned at the 3
termination of the existing license period.
4 That would be very interesting when this 5
SEIS comes out. I would just -- and I mean this 6
respectfully -- remind the NRC and TVA that any federal 7
litigation challenging the SEIS will probably be tried 8
in Chattanooga. The judge will live downwind of this 9
plant. He may be very interested in the quality of the 10 environmental assessment that is done with respect to 11 this license extension.
12 Now the first issue, that bridge that needs 13 to be crossed has to be the need for electricity. As 14 a matter of fact, TVA sold fewer kilowatt hours in 2011 15 than it did in 2010. And then it sold fewer kilowatt 16 hours1.851852e-4 days <br />0.00444 hours <br />2.645503e-5 weeks <br />6.088e-6 months <br /> in 2012 than it did in 2011. And the projection 17 for 2013 is that it may decline again.
18 People are, in fact, adopting efficiency 19 and despite TVA's extremely lame attempts to push energy 20 efficiency. With respect to energy efficiency, I would 21 offer for the record two items. One is TVA's Commission 22 by Contract Energy Partner Study, which shows it's doing 23 about a third of the one percent year-over-year reduction 24 in energy usage that it could accomplish.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 73 I've sat on stake holder groups. We've 1
been promised for two years running we would see new, 2
better, and different energy efficiency programs out 3
of TVA and that's all been frozen. And it's been frozen 4
partly for a lack of revenue and partly because they 5
don't know how to do anything but sell kilowatts.
6 And secondly, the GAO did a similar study, 7
full consideration of energy efficiency and better 8
capital expense for planning. GAO, when they say we 9
don't think that TVA has really looked at the realistic 10 potential for energy efficiency. So those are yet 11 unoffered.
12 One other factor you should look at is that 13 the USEC, the United States Enrichment Corporation, 14 which is a shuck and a boondoggle and has been for years, 15 to create nuclear fuel, has announced that it is closing 16 this year. That represents five percent of the entire 17 load and production of electricity. So we're going to 18 have a five percent decline this year apart from any 19 other energy efficiency.
20 On the 40 year design life, I offer you a 21 copy of the AP Report as it was summarized in our local 22 paper in Chattanooga saying historically everyone 23 thought the plants were designed at best to last 40 years.
24 So the basic theory that the aging hardware is the only 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 74 thing that we really should be looking at and control 1
is far too narrow.
2 We will also be offering for the written 3
comments and we would point to the problems of TVA's 4
nuclear management much of which has been mentioned in 5
these comments up to this point.
6 I would just point to a personal experience 7
where I went to the hearing on the Browns Ferry 1 Red 8
Status and the Chief Inspector for NRC came. And I have 9
never seen a plant Chief Inspector, and I've been to 10 a lot of hearings, stand there and for an hour list what 11 was wrong in the plant. And essentially say that TVA 12 had shown that it was very good at making lists of things 13 that needed to be fixed, of safety problems that needed 14 to be addressed, of equipment that was not operating 15 properly, but all it did was make lists.
16 It could never seem to get any of the 17 significant including safety related equipment and 18 problems addressed and that's why now they've been in 19 a Red Status for so long. And this is TVA's nuclear 20 management's typical situation. They can do one thing 21 right at a time, maybe.
22 They managed to install the new steam 23 generators in the plant at issue here, but while they 24 were at it they fell behind in trying to get rid of the 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 75 red tag on Brown's Ferry, for example.
1 I would associate the club's comments with 2
also the comments made by the Southern Alliance for Clear 3
Energy and those that have been made earlier on the ice 4
condenser problem.
5 Thank you.
6 MR. HAGAR: Ann Harris, you're up.
7 MS. HARRIS: I brought my documents with 8
me. They're all NRC documents, so I don't expect them 9
to be disputed.
10 My name is Ann Harris and I live in Rockwood, 11 Tennessee.
12 MR. HAGAR: Ann, could you move the 13 microphone a little closer to you.
14 MS. HARRIS: The feedback knocks me down.
15 Surely you all can hear me. Trust me, you're getting 16 what I say.
17 NRC, I request that you identify and 18 evaluate the following items for potential environmental 19 impacts prior to any extension of the Sequoyah Nuclear 20 Plant license request for another 20 years. Substandard 21 parts in the area of parts associated with the Watts 22 Bar parts issue. There is evidence of shared parts.
23 This is a longstanding issue that's been on the books 24 since Unit 1. I was instrumental in putting this on 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 76 Region II's list in the mid-1980s.
1 And I'm going to go through these pretty 2
fast, so if you've got questions, you'll have to hit 3
me up at home next week.
4 Tritium issues for weapons for DOE and DOD 5
are beyond the design basis not only of Sequoyah but 6
for Watts Bar. Sequoyah was not designed for the t-bars 7
and the numbers that are needed to produce the amount 8
of tritium needed to fulfill the DOE contract.
9 And why should we have a fight with Iran and North 10 Korea for doing the same thing that we're doing here 11 at Watts Bar and Sequoyah?
12 The number of scrams being so bad you 13 identified them in an Inspection Report tells me that 14 the stress on hardware has to be terrible.
15 What happens to those items that crumbles 16 and no one is looking or there is not a pre-announced 17 happening? What about the concrete? What about the 18 floors? What about the sirens? What about the Control 19 Room?
20 The ice condenser story knows no bounds.
21 The buckling floors, the sublimation, the hardware, the 22 basket, the screws, nobody knows because nobody is 23 minding the store around the ice condenser. And we 24 certainly know that the ice condenser was not designed 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 77 to fit another 20 years. It's not going to make it 1
another 20, so everybody needs to start getting to higher 2
ground.
3 The earthen dams, now, NRC, you're going 4
to tell me that this only concerns Watts Bar. Watts 5
Bar and Sequoyah both are on the same reservoir. Both 6
of them will go down if that dam at Watts Bar goes down.
7 8
That allegation of a problem with -- of 9
earthen dam being a problem has been on the books since 10 the late 1980s because I was the one that put it on the 11 books as a concern because I lived in that community.
12 And for you to extend from the 1980s to 1998, 2004 or 13 2005, and now here in your current Inspection Report, 14 of which I'm carrying here which is about an inch thick, 15 here it is. It comes to my house on a regular basis 16 from you guys.
17 You give them another five years to fix the 18 problem which in effect makes NRC a party to the dangers 19 to the hardware at both Watts Bar and Sequoyah because 20 both emergency diesel generators there won't be an issue.
21 They won't even work.
22 So what are you going to do about backup 23 electricity whenever those things go down because there 24 was a flood in this town -- in the city of 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 78 Chattanooga -- in the mid-80s that put underwater massive 1
amounts of this end of the state of Tennessee. Go back 2
and look. You can look through your history books.
3 Go down to the local library and you'll find pictures 4
of it because it was a major disaster. Things that had 5
never been underwater since TVA had built their first 6
dam was automatically underwater due to those rains.
7 8
Decommissioning funds -- this is kind of 9
like reading Bugs Bunny. "Decommissioning funds, a 10 hundred million dollars disappeared from the 11 decommissioning funds in 2012." This is reported in 12 the report to the SEC, so it's not my opinion. I'm still 13 quoting from you all's documents. At that rate in 14 another five years there won't be any funds to exist 15 because if everybody keeps pulling out a hundred million 16 dollars and this is their slush fund that they're using 17 which they've done it before, there won't be anything 18 here to decommission anything regardless accident or 19 no accident.
20 And remember that all of these issues have 21 safety implications and must be in the SER, the Safety 22 Evaluation Report. All of these items must be 23 identified and evaluated prior to you giving a license 24 extension because, if they're not, that makes you, NRC, 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 79 culpable in whatever happens.
1 Delay in this extension will serve to show 2
that the NRC has thrown away their rubber stamp.
3 Now for those of you people that live in 4
this community and around these nuclear plants, TVA does 5
not have any insurance to take care of your problems 6
if there is a nuclear incident. They call -- only if 7
a reactor blows up, do they call it an accident. Look 8
for the words "unplanned event" and "unexpected."
9 That's called nuke's speak.
10 Now the only compensation from any 11 accidents will come from the U.S. taxpayer. You're 12 going to pay now and maybe get it later.
13 Homeowner policies do not cover any nuclear 14 issues. Do not cover any nuclear issues. Go home and 15 read your homeowner's policy because it explicitly says, 16 "This is exempt from any nuclear accident or issues 17 surrounding them."
18 One of the things that was a discussion here 19 just a few minutes ago and whenever this gentleman here 20 whenever we had the discussion about the fire, if he 21 would look at the February 13th Inspection Report on 22 Sequoyah, he would find on page -- it's in the summary 23 of Findings, Enclosure 2, on Page 1 and 2 and 3.
24 It says, "They were issued a violation for 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 80 failure to implement procedures required for fire 1
protection program implementations. And Inspectors 2
found multiple examples of where fire watches were not 3
conducted in accordance with NRC standards. A failure 4
to establish adequate procedures required for fire 5
protection program implementation caused compensatory 6
measures.
The program implementation caused 7
compensatory measures, fire watches, to not be 8
adequately completed and could have potentially 9
compromised the ability to safely shutdown the plant 10 in the event of a fire in any of the fire zones where 11 the fire watches were required."
12 Maybe you, Region II, maybe you ought to 13 give this up to these boys up in D.C. They probably 14 would appreciate it since this has to be something that 15 is not on their radar screen.
16 And my comments will be in writing and I 17 will send them in to the appropriate place.
18 Thank you.
19 MR. HAGAR: Thank you, Ann.
20 Well, at this point everyone who told us 21 they wanted to speak has had an opportunity to speak.
22 So let me ask again. Is there anyone in the audience 23 who wants to say something that has not yet had a chance 24 to do so?
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 81 Well, then let me thank everyone. Thanks 1
to everyone who prepared a presentation, delivered it.
2 Thanks to everyone who made statements on their own.
3 And thanks to everyone who asked a clarifying question 4
because good exchange of information is what this meeting 5
was about. And thanks to all of you for giving the 6
speakers your time and attention.
7 Let me remind you that we would like you 8
to pick up a meeting feedback form if you haven't already 9
and either turn it into us or mail it to us. And thanks 10 in advance for providing feedback.
11 Does anybody have any questions or any final 12 comments?
13 Well, then this meeting is concluded.
14 Thank you very much for your time and 15 attention.
16 (Whereupon, this meeting was concluded at 17 7:52 p.m.)
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 82 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13