ML19241A766

Limited Appearance Statement from Michael Ossing Regarding the Seabrook Station Unit 1 License Amendment Application

ML19241A766
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	08/29/2019
From:	Ossing M - No Known Affiliation
To:	Mattison M Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
SECY/RAS
References
Download: ML19241A766 (4)

Text

From: Michael Ossing To: Mattison, Molly; Docket, Hearing Cc: Michael Ossing

Subject:

[External_Sender] Michael Ossing Written Comments for the Seabrook Station ASLB Hearing on September 23, 2019 Date: Thursday, August 29, 2019 8:43:01 AM Attachments: Seabrook Station ASLB Oral StatementSept 2019 Ossing.docx Administrative Judge Ronald M. Spritzer, Chairman and Molly Mattison:

Attached is my written statement that I would like to have entered into the record (read at the meeting if time permits) and included in the NRC ASLB file for this matter (Seabrook Station ASLB Hearing September 24 - 27, 2019). I apologize in advance for not being in attendance for the September 23, 2019 opportunity to present my views in person the ASLB Judges.

Thanks in advance for taking the time to read my statement.

All the best in your deliberations on this issue.

Michael Ossing 43 Varley Road Marlboro, MA 01752 508-481-6189

Seabrook Station ASLB Evidentiary Hearing - 9/23/19 Michael Ossing Oral Statement Hello and good evening to Administrative Judge Ronald M.

Spritzer, Chairman the members of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) and thank you for allowing me to express my views on the challenge to an amendment to the Seabrook nuclear power plants operating license, regarding concrete degradation caused by the alkali-silica reaction.

My name is Michael Ossing and I reside in Marlboro Massachusetts. I have worked in the nuclear power industry for over 35 years. I am currently in my 20th year as a public servant as an elected official as a Councilor-at Large for the City of Marlboro.

I have four points I would like to make to reinforce why the challenge to the license amendment for ASR should be dismissed.

First - technical competence of the individuals involved in this complex issue.

• From the utility side, the industries brightest and most technically competent individuals in the nuclear industry as well as academia have reviewed the ASR issue and all concluded the issue is not a safety threat and can be managed. Additionally, the NRC Region 1 staff, the NRR 1

staff engineers and the ACRS (an independent board made up of some of the most competent minds in various technical industries and academia) have all reached similar conclusions.

Second - Nine years of review

• The issue has been studied since 2010 - nine years!

There have been tens of millions of dollars spent on testing, studies and evaluations. The NRC has conducted numerous technical reviews, audits and inspections and have all indicated that this is not a safety issue and can be managed.

Third - Monitoring programs

• The strength and backbone of the nuclear industry is defense in depth. The ASR monitoring program is another example of defense in depth. The ASR monitoring programs that are part of the operating license as well as license renewal all have acceptance criteria that should movement in concrete be observed, there are actions to take. And I remind everyone, for nine years there has been monitoring of concrete issues.

Concrete does not move fast and should it move it is very slow. The monitoring and walkdown programs in place now have shown that there has been no appreciable movement over this time period. One could conclude that the issue has plateaued. The proof will be in the 2

monitoring program that will be reported to and evaluated by the NRC. The monitoring program is part of the current and renewed Seabrook operating license.

Fourth and Finally - Fact versus Fear

• If individuals opposed to the issue have sound facts to support their position it makes for a more productive discussion. The fear and resistance at all costs by anti-nuclear individuals just furthers a misguided political agenda. The safe operation of US nuclear power plants since the late 1950s with no deaths to the public related to the operation of nuclear power plants demonstrates nuclear power can provide dependable, reliable, carbon free energy source that the global community so desperately needs.

To conclude, I urge the ASLB to dismiss the C-10 contention and the challenge to the Seabrook license amendment based on the solid technical evidence and not succumb to political pressure by individuals that are trying to further their political careers and agendas.

Thank you for listening.

Michael Ossing 43 Varley Road Marlboro, MA 01752 3