ML20034F132
| ML20034F132 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/23/1993 |
| From: | NRC |
| To: | |
| References | |
| FRN-57FR28645, RULE-PR-72 NUDOCS 9303020312 | |
| Download: ML20034F132 (89) | |
Text
..
GM'
" n.:._.
%?i$
l61 Y(L,1ggg)
OFFICIALTRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS 93 FO 23 K M
'{
~.
ON Nuclear Regulatory Commission Workshop on Process-for Approval
Title:
f Dry Spent Fuel Storage Casks j
Docket No.
\\
LOCAI1ON:
Lansing, Michigan DATE Tuesday, February 23, 1993 PAG S 1 87
{
i A
i ANN RILEY& ASSOCIATES, LTD.
(,.
1612 KSt N.W., Suite 300 NEnhinarna; D.C 20006 g
(202) 295-3950 i.
9303020312 930223 i
PDR PR
-72 57FR29645 PDR
- a -.
1 UNITED STATES i
2 NUCLEAR--REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
4 5
WORKSHOP ON PROCESS FOR APPROVAL 6
OF DRY SPENT FUEL STORAGE CASKS 7
8 9
f 10 11 12 TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1993 13 LANSING, MICHIGAN 14 15 16 17 18 19.
20 i
a 21 22 23 24 25 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
)
Court Reporters 1612'K Street', N.W.,-Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20006L (202) 293-3950
2 1=
ATTENDEES:-
- /
2
.3 FRANK J.
KELLEY 4
- Attorney General 5
6 JOHN SCHEARBARTH 7
Office of the Attorney General 8
9 MICHAEL LEFFLER 10 Assistant in Charge of the Environmental Division 11 12 LOUIS FERNANDEZ 13 Assistant in Charge of the Special Litigation 14 Division
.f' 15 16 On behalf of the State of Michigan 17 ROBERT M. BERNERO, Director 18 Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
19 20 MARTIN MALSCH, Deputy 21 General Counsel for Licensing and Regulation-22 office of the General Counsel 23 24 25 f'
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
'3 1
JACK W. ROE, Director 2
. Division of Reactor Projects III, IV, V 3
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 4
5 CHARLES HAUGHNEY, Chief 6
Sourde Containment and Devices Branch 7
8 FRITZ STURZ, Section Leader 9
Source Containment and Devices Branch 10 11 PAUL LOHAUS, Chief 12 Low-Level Waste Management Branch 13
'14 ROLAND LICKUS 15 State Liaison Officer, Region III 16 17 JAN STRASMA 18 Public Affairs Officer, Region III 19 20 JIM HELLER 21 Senior Resident Inspector, Palisades, Region III 22 23 24 e
25 10R7 RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Wa'shington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
4 1
PROCEEDINGS' 2
[9:45-A.M.)
]
i 3
ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
Good morning ladies and 4
gentleman, I'm Frank Kelley, Attorney General for the State 5
of Michigan.
I would like to welcome each of you to1this 6
morning's meeting regarding the storage of high-level radioactive waste at the Palisades Nuclear Facility.
7 8
I especially want to welcome the staff members of 9
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and thank them for their 10 willingness to participate in this forum.
They're headed by 11 Mr. Bob Bernero, the gentleman to my immediate right.
Others 12 will be introduced later.
Mr. Bernero is the Director of the l
13 Of fice of Nuclear Material, Safety and Safeguarding of L the 14 Nuclear Regulatory Agency.
15 I also want to acknowledge the tireless work of the 16 citizens groups and the individuals who have come forward to 17 challenge Consumer Powers' plans to store spent nuclear fuel la rods in a dry cask storage system.
I.have heard from many 19 Michigan citizens by letter, phone, and personal contacts, 20 saying that they want the difficult questions asked and 21 answered before the Commission approves the use of this 22 technology.
23 As you know, I share these concerns and I want to 24 reiterate my firm position that the ~ Commission and the. people 25 of Michigan can be well served only by a full, formal hearing I
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters i
1612 K Street, N.W, Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
S' 1
on the issues involved here, and I'm mindful that this 2
informe-1 meeting can be a useful precursor to such a hearing.
3 But, I believe that the questions and issues raised today will-only serve to demonstrate even more clearly the necessity for 4
5 a formal taking of testimony and the opportunity to challenge 6
witnesses.
7 I'm also asking officials from other states to join 8
me in calling for a public hearing.
I'm contacting officials 9
in other states who have vested interest in the outcome of the 10 decisions made regarding the Palisades Facility, focusing 11 especially on those states bordering the Great Lakes system.
12 As we know, when it impacts on one of the Lakes it impacts 13 on the entire system, and I feel that those states should have 14 input in the decision regarding the Palisades Facility.
15 In the past months the concerns about the proposed 16 storage system have been increasing in the minds of citizens 17 and public officials.
We hear the continued controversy over 18 finding permanent disposal sites for all radioactive waste, 19 and we fear that those permanent solutions are far in the 20 future.
We want to know that any system used to store high-21 level radioactive waste will be able to contain the 22 radioactivity for as long as is necessary.
23 We also know that the ventilated storage cask, VSC-24 24, is not the only technology available.
Other, better 25
- options, may exist, and we want the very best that is i
I 1
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 j
Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950 i
s
6 available 'for the concerned citizens and for those of us who 1
2 care deeply about the safety of these systems.
The best is 3
the only option that we can and should accept.
4 I think that sums up why we are here today, and a
5 since we have a great deal of ground to cover.I would like to 6
describe the format so we can get on with the questions and 7
concerns.
Now, the order of events is as follows:
I will resume my seat and I will pose the first few questions and the 8
9 Commission staf f will provide at least preliminary answers to 10 those questions.
I have some prepared questions, which you 11 as citizens, may find encompasses some of your own concerns.
12 I've tried to make them general and generic to cover most of 13 the concerns in order to get things out on the table.
14 Now, following my period of questioning there will 15 be several individuals representing citizens groups.
These 16 individuals will each have tive minutes to pose questions to 17 the Commission.
We've allowed more time for representatives 18 since they are each representing large groups of interested 19 citizens.
Following those group representatives, individual 20 citizens will have an opportunity to pose questions and raise 21 concerns.
Each individual may take three minutes at the 22 microphone to raise your particular issues.
-l 23 The Commission will not be bound to respond to
.l 24 questions from citizens groups or individual citizens at this 25 time.
They will,
- however, respond to your questions in
{
~
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
7-1 written form in the NRC Comments, and if time runs out before 2
you'are able to voice your concerns,.it is my understanding, 3
and at my request, the NRC will accept comments generated by 4
this meeting for,five more business days.
5 Now, I should like to acknowledge on my side here, 6
first gentleman to my far left is Mr. Mike Leffler, the Head 7
of my Environmental Division.
Next' to him is Mr. Louis 8
Fernandez, who is head of our Special Litigation Division and 9
has been involved in litigation over the years with public 10 utilities such as Consumer Power.
And next to him, also with-11 my Environmental Division, a man who has been' working very,
12 hard on this case is Mr. John Schearbarth, Assistant Attorney-13 General.
14 And, as I stated to my immediate right, is Mr. Bob-15 Bernero.
I would like Mr. Bernero to just acknowledge'who 16 are members of his staff that are present with us today, and 17 then I'll proceed with the questioning.
18 MR. BERNERO:
Thank you, Mr. Attorney General.
19 We ' are happy to be here today as requested by the 20 Attorney General, and our primary purpose here is to_ listen 21 to hear your comments.
We have a fair number of NRC people.
22 here.
Myself, I'm director of the Office that does licensing'
{
23 of this sort of material.
Mr. Marty Malsch, who is our Deputy 24 General Counsel.
Charles Haughney, who 'is Chief of the Seals, j
l 25 Sources and-Devices Branch, which focus on equipment such as s
1 ANN-RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
j Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W., Suite 300.
i Washington, D.C. 20006 (202).293-3950 i
8 1-this._
And~Mr. Jack Roe, our Division Director for Reactor 2
Projec.t.s associated with Palisades.
We also have our Senior 3
Resident Inspector, Jim Heller from Palisades here.
Fritz-4 Sturz, who works for Charlie Haughney in' the actual Licensing 5
Review activities, and Paul Lohaus, who is the Rulemaking 6
Branch Chief fdr this generic rulemaking.
7 Time permitting, we want to hear your comments, but-'
8 time permitting, if it's possible to answer any questions we 9
will try to do that.
10 I would like to say just.a few words about the 11 process we're engaged in here.
We often license specific 12 facilities, and most of you may be familiar with that, such 13 as licensing a nuclear reactor, or we have, on a number of 14 occasions, licensed specific facilities for the storage of I
15 spent fuel.
This technology is rather widely developed now.
16 And we have another process, though, of generic licensing-17 And generic licensing, which is done by rulemaking and by.
18 certification for such rulemaking, is a process by which we 19 can license things that are generically usable such as a 20 shipping cask for spent material or for radiography sources, I
21 things like that, high intensity radioactive packages, and 22 these are done through a generic process through rulemaking, 23 and that's what we're engaged in here.
-1 24 The VSC-24 cask, the Attorney General mentioned, is l
25 one of a general design type.
We have certified some already.
1
)
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
~
Court Reporters
'{
1612 K_ Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 1
(202) 293-3950
)
.~
9 1
and this one is a general certification rulemaking.
The 2
Palisades plant happens to'be the first case that would use 3
it.
We also know of at least two other reactor stations that
~
4 are proposing to use that generally. certified cask,-if and 5
when it's available.
So, we are in the final stages of our
^
6 comment period 'on this rulemaking.
7 As the Attorney General
- said, this -is a -very' 8
important part.
This meeting is a very important part of that 9
comment period, and there will be available at the door when 10 you leave, a small sheet to encourage you with the address and 11 the procedure, for any further comments you might have after 12 this meeting.
So, we would welcome any and all comments that 13 you have.
14 Thank you.
(
15 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
I am going to pose this 16 first question to the honorable delegation of the NRC:
The 17 storage of high-level nuclear waste is not a new issue, it has 18 been 35 years since Congress authorized the licensing of 19 nuclear power plants.
Even then concerned
- citizens, 20 especially scientists who knew the dangers of radioactivity, 21 cried out for caution and planning for the inevitable build-22 up of high-level radioactive waste.
In response, Congress 23 authorized the development of a nuclear waste depository,_or 24 repository.
Now, 35 years later, there is no repository, and 25 no hopes of having one in the near future.
Both industry and ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
1
-10 J
1-the Federal Government have put off considering the problem l
2 until, tow.
Industry says they can no longer contain the waste 3
within their current structures.
The repository promised for 4
1998 will not be ready.
If construction begins at'all the facility will not be ready until well into the 21st Century.
5 6
Now industry wants a quick approval for interim measures.
7 On behalf of all the citizens of Michigan, I ask 8
you, what assurance can you give that the interim storage cask 9
system planned for the Palisades facility will not become a' i
10 permanent repository on the shores of Lake Michigan, less than 11 300 feet from the water?
12 MR. BERNERO:
Let me start by going back just a few 13 years when the Congress recognized that the delays in high-14 level waste repository would indeed require spent fuel 15 storage, not only in the spent fuel pools at the reactors, but 16 by some supplementary means.
17 The Congress directed that there be developed safe 18 technology for additional or supplementary storage, and that is basically the program that produced the technology of dry 19 20 storage we now have and this cask is simply one alternative 21 in it.
22 The progress on the repository, the high-level waste 23 repository, is of ten disappointing when you look at it because 24 it is a very difficult thing to get a site where there is 25 public acceptance.
The classic resistance to having a I
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD, Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006
'(202) 293-3950 t
's 11 1
repository, the permanent disposal of high level waste has led E
2 to many discussions and many deliberations in the Congress, 3
and right now, at the direction of the Congress, there is'one t
4 site being developed for possible use; that is ~ the Yucca 5
Mountain site in Nevada.
It is not without' controversy.
It certainly will 'not be available by 1998 when it was originally 6
7 envisioned to be able to accept spent fuel.
It will -- right 8
now, if it stays on schedule, not have an application until I
9 the year 2001, which is eight years from now.
10 There.is some progress.
The first entry into the 11 ground with the experimental shaf t is on a schedule that would begin opening the ground in April of this year -- April 2nd 12 i
13 in fact.
And in the meanwhile, as the Congress directed, we 14 have looked very carefully at dry storage and spent fuel, as 15 well as wet storage,. to see whether it is a safe interim
.i 16 alternative because we consider final disposal the primary 17 option.
And we have evaluated the technology available and 18 our licensing based'on that evaluation because we see the 19 technology with low temperatures and careful designs that can 1
20 be safe for at least a hundred years.
We don't want it to 21 stay around for a hundred years, but we want to be sure it's 22 very safe while we maintain the priority of getting. a 23 repository on line, p
24 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
Thank you.
On that same 25 subject, Mr. Bernero.
Unlike other storage casks the VSC-
'(
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters
+
1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 j
Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950 i
4
r 12
-1 24, as I-understand it, planned for the Palisades site, -is not 2
designTd to be transported to a permanent repository.
- Now, 3
if and when one becones available doesn't this fact confirm 4
the suggestion that the.VSC-24 is designed for permanent on-5 site storage?
What about transportational permanent site?
6 Has Consumer Power submitted plans to the NRC regarding how 7
these spent nuclear fuel rods will be transported?
8 MR. BERNEFO:
If I could speak to that one.
In the 9
original designs fo: spent fuel storage there were concepts 10 that engaged large metal casks, very heavy, what one might-11 call one piece metal casks, and there was some thought that 12 they would be used for storage at first, and possible later i
13 certified for transport.
Other designs have come forward and 14 now the trend seems to be to, what I would describe as a.
i 15 concrete and cartridge storage system, where the spent fuel t
16 is in a metal caninter or a can, and that is put into either 17 a single concrete structure or individual concrete shells, 18 such as the VSC-24.
19 There is a lot of attention being paid right now, 20 and the Department of Energy is sponsoring this work, to have 21 multi-purpose canisters whereby these systems, such as the 22 VSC-24 canister, or one that is used at another design called 23
- NUHOMS, might be not only stored in a system, but also 24 transported in a variation of the system.
That's being 25 evaluated right now. We are reviewing a dual purpose shipping k
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
.~.
13 1
cask, and there is further review developing on these multi-2 purposm storage and transport systems.
3 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
Thank you.
In other 4
words, at this point as f ar as the VSC-24 is concerned inandof
'5 itself, is not a transportable design.
6 (Mr.'Bernero_ indicated in the negative) 7 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
All right.
Second 8
question and one that concerns me based on the record.
I'm 9
not being provocative here and I will show you why:
Can 10 Consumer Power Company be trusted?
11 In the light of Consumer Poweris past habit' of 12 ignoring the quality of service, preferring to maximize the 13 profits of its parent holding, company, how will the.NRC be 14 assured that the Consumer Power's management will not again i
15 place CMS energy's profit motives above safety?
16 Now, I am not the only one who has noticed 'this-l 17 tenancy at Consumer Power.
The-following quotations will 18 illustrate the veracity of my concerns:
19 In May of 1991-Opinion and Order in a Consumer Power 20 case, the Michigan Public Service Commission stated, and I 21 quote:
" Consumers executives have been driven to a great 22 degree by nothing more than self interest and personal 23 profit."
That's the opinion of the Commission, May the 7th, 24 1991, Page 56.
25 In testimony given during a Congressional Committee ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
b 14 in August of 1991 Congressman Wolpe concluded, af ter hearings:
1 2
"The ccmpany has betrayed the public's trust by recklessly 3
putting its own' profits ahead of the health and well being of~
4 the people it's suppose to serve."
5 And finally, even Senior Vice-President Paul Albert 6
of Consumer Power, in an internal magazine commented on the; r
7 changed attitude of the company, saying, and I quote:
"As a 8
company Consumer Power's effectiveness used to be measured t
9 solely by reliability.
With deregulation and competition we-10 are now seeing that measurement shift towards profitability, 11 and in most cases reliability by itself can become a restraint 12 rather than a striving force."
i 13 So we are concerned and we want you to know that, 14 and I think that I am expressing the concern of literally 15 thousands of people in che State.
16 I wonder if you're familiar with their past.
17 MR.
BERNERO:
- Well, we, of
- course, regulate 18 Consumers Power at their reactor sites, and in a general 19 license, such as the VSC-24 a reactor operator is the only 20 authorized user of such a storage cask.
_We have a rather 21 intricate system of monitoring their performance as a reactor 22 owner and operator, and I can only say that we maintain 23 vigilance in this regard continually, and rely on that as our 24 assurance that they can handle this material safely.
25 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY: Thank you. Third question
?
I ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
I 15 1
is:
In provision of the Code of Federal Regulations regarding 2
storagT of high-level radioactive waste states as follows.
3 I am quoting from 10 CFR Part 72.122 (h) (4) :
" Storage 4
confinement systems must have the capability for continuous 5
monitoring in a manner such that the licensee will be able to
~
6 determine when corrective action needs to be taken to maintain 7
safety storage conditions."
8
- Now, it is my understanding,
- however, tha. the 9
Commission has approved less than continuous monitoring,-
10 possibly no monitoring at all, for the VSC-24.
Why is 11 monitoring not required for this storage system when your own 12 rules mandate a continuous monitoring capability?
What 13 assurance does the public have that the casks will not 14 overheat, causing structural damage to the concrete and to the -
15 interior system undermining the protection the cask can 16 provide?
' i 17 MR. BERNERO:
I'd like Mr. Haughney, the Branch 18 Chief for the Design to respond to that.
19 MR.
HAUGHNEY:
Thank you.
My name's Charlie 20 Haughney.
21 The first thing is, I think there's a -- personally f
22 there's an unfortunate use of the word " continuous"'in that 23 particular phrase, in the sentence in the regulations.
24 Nonetheless the way the concept of monitoring is applied is 25 to include some set of a combination of oversight, either r
I ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters l
1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950-
=
16 1
through personal observation or through periodic measurements 2
of pasameters, such as temperature, radiation dose. rate 3
sampling, this sort of thing.
4 That particular Regulation applies to all the 5
storage casks that we have either already certified for 6
general use or'for those cask systems, which we've licensed 7
specifically at a few sites around the country.
It again.
8 faces ua here in this rulemaking, which not yet complete.
9 We've received quite a number of comments on this 10 particular provision, and they all point to the same. issues 11 that you've summarized very well this morning. And one of the l
12 things that we've done in response to that comment is looked 13 very carefully at our own requirements that we're putting in 14 the certificate of Compliance for this particular cask, and.
15 we're considering, very seriously, to upgrade those and make 16 them more elaborate; more functions, more frequently would be 17
- observed, monitored, surveilled, to ensure the cask 18 performance was in fact satisfactory.
t 19 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
In other words you're i
20 fully mindful of the previous standards and you are going to 21 take consideration of a new standard in which will cover the 22 safety in this new type cask; is that what you're saying?
23 MR. HAUGHNEY:
Yes.
We want to ensure that this 24 particular provision of the Certificate in fact ensures 25 adequate safety throughout the cask performance, both right I
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters i
1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950 1
17 1
after it's loaded and throughout its operating life.
2 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
So -there. will be an 3
implementation of what you're saying, in other words?
~
4 MR. HAUGHNEY:
That's correct.
5 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
Gentleman, a
fourth 6
question:
It is my understanding that surveillance 7
requirements for the cask exterior air inlets and outlets 8
include a drive by or walk by examination of-not more than 9
once each week.
Now, I understand that these casks will stand 10 18 feet high and that blockage of their air exchange systems 11 could cause overheating within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.
12 Now, how could a drive by or walk by examination 13 provide adequate information about the condition of all air 14 inlets and outlets?
Might not some of these~become blocked i
15 unbeknownst to the observer causing overheating within the 16 cask, and if observations conducted no more than once each 17 week, isn't this far less than adequate surveillance?_
t 18 MR.
HAUGHNEY:
This particular question really 19 relates to the first one; an important provision.
20 The first thing I'd like to comment on is the' issue a
21 of the limit of 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.
That limit applies to a time frame 22 in which the concrete temperature on the inner wall of the so-23 called VCC, vertical concrete' cylinder, begins to rise above 24 a temperature at which the moisture starts.to be driven awayl-1 25 from the concrete.
i I'
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,-Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950 w
-18 1
What it really means is that there is the potential 2
onset-erf long term reduction in the strength of the concrete.
3 Nothing happens instantaneously at 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> or even or several 4
days.
But if the concrete is taken to that temperature and 5
heated for a while one cannot be sure of its performance over 6
a long period of time like months or years.
So in any event 7
we had the limit in there as a conservative factor.
8 The surveillance-that was in the draft certificate 9
was in f act weekly, a weekly observation of vents to check for 10 blockage. And the reason that it was checked for blockage was 11 just as you say, to ensure that the natural convection airflow 12 into the inlet, up around the steel basket, and out the 13 outlet, was maintained properly.
14 We're looking at changing that frequency of the 15 visual surveillance to daily.
In addition we're looking at 16 doing some specific temperature performance measurements, both t
17 during the start up phase of the initial cask on site, and 18 then periodically, during the performance of that cask.
And 19 in addition, we're looking at periodic examination of the-20 interior of the annulus between the concrete cylinder and the 21 steel basket to ensure that there's. no particular.nechanism 1
22 for blockage.
~
23 One of the -- just as sidebar to this.
One of the 24-questions that came up, which I think was a' good question, 25 was_the fact that potentially insects could fly through the I
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington,'D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
19 1
quarter inch size holes in the screens and then build a nest 2
inside--the annular space.
3 on its face that appears to be reasonable, although the totai volume in there is rather large, and it's a little 4
5 difficult to visualize a nest of that size.
But even more so G
our discussions with entomologists indicate that the high air 7
temperatures inside there are very hostile to insects.
We're 8
still looking at that question, but it looks like it's not an 9
environmentally acceptable area for nests to be built.
In 10 fact the nests, as I understand it, have really a heat 11 tranafer function, to keep this large body of sm.'11 animals 12 cool.
And so the inside of a spent fuel cask is not a very 13 likely location for that to occur.
14 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY: I understand that the VSC-
+
15 24 has never been constructed or tested by the Department of 16 Energy, even though the Department of Energy operates testing 17 facilities for dry storage cask. Now, although a smaller cask 18 system was tested by the Department of Energy, doesn't the 1
19 lack of testing for this particular systems mean that the 20 Palisades facility will be the first testing ground for this 21 particular cask system?
22 I - also want to know if the Commission has 'ever 23 approved the smaller tested version of this system, and if-
-24 not, what changes have been made to the VSC-24 which lead to-25 the NRC's proposed certificate of compliance over and above i
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950.,
)
20.
1 the smaller version, which was tested by the Department of 2
Encrgy?
3 MR. HAUGENEY:
The VSC-17, which was the version tested by the Department of Energy, has not been certified by 4
5 the NRC.
We have no application in front of us to consider 6
it.
t 7
The VSC-24 is a different design.
It's designed to-8 take a large number of fuel bundles; 24 instead of 17.
In 9
fact the VSC-24 has not been constructed or specifically 10 tested in a, you know, a identical one on one type of= design 11 test.
12 I might say that that's not necessarily completely 13 unusual for large devices.
The fundamental basis that.we are 14 relying on for our examination of the thermal performance of 15 that cask and the radiation shielding and all the other safety 16 criteria, is the analytical submission that we received on our.
17 docket from the cask vendor, and that submission's been 18 questioned by us in a series of questions and answers and 19 meetings and it's been modified a number of times.
.And so 20 that's the fundamental reliance we use.
21 I might just ask, because you specifically asked, 22 Mr. Sturz, who works for me, to talk about the intent of the-23 particular test of the VSC-17 that was done for-the. Energy 24 Department.
If you can add something to that.
25 MR. STURZ : The VSC-17' cask, while. a smaller version I
\\
1 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters j
1612 K Street,-N.W., Suite 300 1
Washington, D.C. 20006
-(202). 293-3950
21 of the VSC-24, operates under the same principals of cooling, 1
and even though there are 17 slots for fuel assemblies, the 2
3 Department of Energy did store consolidated fuel.
In fact
~
4 they stored twice as much fuel assemblies.
They put 34 5
assemblies worth into 17 slots and demonstrated that the cask, 6
through the saine. principals of heat transfer, could provide 7
adequate cooling and demonstrated that the cask provides 8
adequate shielding radiation protection shielding, and 9
adequate cooling of the fuel, and therefore the same physics 10 principals can be applied to the VSC-24 cask.
11 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
I would just like to point 12 out in passing that since the VSC-17 was thoroughly tested and 13 from what I've heard here the VSC-24 will actually be an on-14 the-job testing facing the reality of the situation.
It just is seems to be that this is the type of procedural question that, 16 as a lawyer, I would want testimony taken as to determine why 17 this type of testing was passed over and what the wisdom of 18 it was and what scientific reasons there were for not 19 following the same procedure as they did with VSC-17?
I just 20 mention that in passing as more indication of why we should 21 go into this more in depth.
22 My last question, gentleman: _
Is it true that the 23 original manufacturer and/or designer of the VSC-24 ended its 24 involvement with the cask? For instance, did a parent company-25 disappear from the scene, and if so, has the NRC attempted to-I ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
1 22 1
ascertain the reason for the action to discover if the reason 2
relate.a.to safety of the task or liability or any of-those 3
consequences?
]
4
- MR. HAUGHNEY:
As I understand this, and I haven't 5
exhaustively studied it, particularly from a legal point of J
6 view, the firrd that designed the so-called NUHOMS modular 7
system, which is the horizontal block concrete system, the key 8
person in that design formed a new company, which. is now 9
called Pacific Sierra Nuclear, and they are the designer and 10 the applicant for the VSC-24.
So there was a formation of a 11 new company, a s;-in-of f, and you know, the brains and the idea 12 of trying the horizontal design, which is certainly reflected 13 in the vertical design that we see in front of us.
14 But I think it 's important to note, and I can't i
15 comment on all the financial arrangements and other 16 pertinencies that accompany those business transactions, that 17 we've been really focusing on our job, which is the safety 18 review of both designs, as a matter of fact.
And from that 19 standpoint I
haven't seen anything in terms of the 20 applications from either applicant that -- which I would say 21 that their business transactions have effected adversely their 22 safety transactions.
I've had to ask them all questions,.and-23 we haven't completed our review as quickly as they might like, 24 but that's because we haven't been satisfied.
But, I see that' 25 as being just the typical interaction between the NRC and an 9
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
23 1
applicant on a safety basis.
2 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
Thank you.
3 MR. HAUGHNEY:
You're welcome.
~
4 MR. BERNERO:
If I could just add a point.
When I 5
was speaking earlier about the trends in developing 6
transportable ciesigns, these two systems, the NUHOMS design, 7
which is a concrete structure within many individual canisters 8
in it, and the VSC-24, which is individual concrete structures 9
with one canister each, these are the two systems or the 10 technology that appears to be most attractive.to the 11 Department of Energy and its developers.
And I was referring 12 to both of them, and, they are very similar in physical 13 principal.
14 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
Thank you.
15 At this time I would like to go to the audience now 16 and welcome a distinguished constituent of our State who has 17 worked with me in other projects and shares a national 18 reputation concern of the environment.
Today she will be 19 representing, I believe, the' Sierra Club, the Don't Waste 20 Michigan organization, and perhaps others.
And because she's 21 representing more than one organization we have allowed that 22 she be given at least ten minutes.
Therefore I would like, 23 to either microphone that-is convenient to her, I would like 24 to call on at this time, Dr. Mary Sinclair.
25 DR.
SINCIAIR:
Thank you.
I appreciate you're ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
24 willing to listen to us this morning and hear our questions.
1 2
My name is Mary Sinclair and I am here as co-chair 3
of a
coalition of citizens' groups called Don't Waste Michigan $ which extend from Southern Michigan to 4
the Upper 5
Peninsula, and it includes medical societies of Genesee County 6
and-Kalamazoo County.
I'm also a long term member of the 7
National Energy Policy Committee of the Sierra Club, and I 8
have specific endorsement and approval from the Chairman of 9
the National Energy Policy Committee, Dr.
- Johnsrud, to 10 represent the Sierra Club here today on this issue.
So this 11 is a combined membership of approximately 600,000 citizens.
12 We welcome this meeting as a forum for setting out 13 a number of significant safety issues in regard to the 14 proposed storage of high-level nuclear waste in untested-15 concrete cask systems.
These casks will stand upright on a 16 concrete pad, approximately 150 yards from the shore of L'ake 17 Michigan at the Palisades Nuclear Plant site.
We -will 18 demonstrate that these issues can only be addressed through 19 a
public hearing conducted under the rules-of the 20 Administrative Procedures Act.
21 The Nuclear Regulatory commission has stated that 22 it will-license these casks for storage only, and they are 23 explicit about the fact that there is no provision for' 24 transportation off site. The casks will weight about 128 tons 25 when loaded and they are not transportable.
And I have ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 P
25
' referenced this from both the Wisconsin electric Power company 1
l 2
and fr'Tm Mr. Samsworth from the NRC.
Throughout this paper 3
I have provided references for every single statement that I 4
am making.
5 Given these facts we can only reach the conclusion 6
that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is in the' process of 7
establishing a permanent high-level nuclear waste storage dump 8
in the heart of the Great Lakes Region.
9 There are already 3200 sites in the country that 10 have been contaminated by the Department of Energy and'its-11 weapons program, many of them contaminated with nuclear waste.
12 We cannot allow our federal agencies to continue to 13 contaminate our land with no public input.
4 14 In addition the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is 15 violating its own rules in proceeding with this project in 16 this manner without a public hearing, and these violations are -
17 as follows:
18 In NRC's final rule of July 8th, 1990, it states 19 that:
" Hearing processes do not ' apply when issues are 20 resolved generically by rulemaking."
However there are 21 significant safety issues that have not and cannot be resolved '
22 through the rulemaking process in connection with this cask.
23 According to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission these tests 24 have to do with the most critical function of the cask.
That 1
25 is, verifying its heat removal capacity.
i i
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters-1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202)- 293-3950
-o
26 1
The NRC itself has ordered the first test of this 2
cask wtmn the first cask system is to be used at the Palisades 3
plant.
A letter from the NRC to the vendor of the cask
~
4 discusses the f act that the NRC views this preoperational test 5
as necessary because the fuel clad temperatures predicted by 6
the vendor are only four degrees below the accident conditions 7
of the metal basked within the concrete cask, ' which will 8
actually hold the fuel.
The letter also states the concrete 9
temperatures predicted are very close to the accident 10 conditions for the concrete ~ cask.
11 Furthermore, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's 12 Safety Evaluation Report of May 6,
'92 states that during this 13 first test, "If excessive temperatures cause the cask to 14 perform in an unacceptable manner and/or temperatures cannot 15 be controlled to within acceptable limits, the cask shall be 16 unloaded."
This indicates that this is an experiment for 17 resolving certain safety issues which have no and cannot be 18 resolved through the rulemaking process.
19 The Safety Evaluation Report of the NRC states that 20 the VSC is a new systems which has not been built or tested 21 before and that approval of site-specific procedures is 22 contingent on successful demonstration of "first-of-a-kind" 23 features.
These tests must be done onsite.of a nuclear plant 24 with spent fuel facilities.
This means that the first tests 25 of the VSC-24 is to take place with the loading of fuel within
/
j ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
27 1
the opent fuel facility at the Palisades plant.
2 Among these first-of-a-kind features are many parts 3
and much equipment that is part of the first test of the casks 4
in the f'uel transfer operation at the opent fuel pool at 5
Palisades.
These parts are frequently referred to in the 6
Safety Evaluation Reports as needing further review and 7
approvals.
They include lifting cables, lif ting yokes and so 8
on.
And for example, in one SER comment it refers to, a 9
sling or cable set attached in certain ways, and it says, no 10 information was presented for this cable set.
And the two 11 pieces of equipment are used only in the spent fuel pool and 12 therefore the approval for their use is subject to 10 CFR part c
13 50 review.
End of quote (sic).
14 The use of the metal transfer cask also occurs 15 entirely inside the spent fuel pool building.
The Safety 16 Evaluation Report evaluated this cask as a special 1.fting 17 device and because of the location for its use,
... final 18 approval of the design must come from separate Part 50.
19 review."
And this calls for a licensing procedure; this is 20 your own words.
In other words, this cask should not be 21 considered for approval by itself, but only in conjunction 22 with all the equipment, as well sa operator training that must '
23 be available and proved safe for fuel transfer.
All these are 24 safety problems that cannot be resolved through the rulemaking 25 process.and.should be part of a formal public review.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950'
~
f
28 1
The NRC has established a rule called subpart K of 2
10 CFP72 on which the Commission relies to go forward with 3
this project without a public hearing under the general
~
4 license.
However, in Section 72.218 of that ruling, we find 5
that management of spent fuel at the reactor,
...must include
?
a plan for the' removing of the spent fuel stored under this 6
7 general license fron the reactor site."
Since the NRC is 8
licensing these casks for - storage 'only, with no plans for 9
offsite transport, it is again in violation of its own rule.
10 The NRC's regulation in subpart L states that there 11 should be consideration of "... compatibility with removal of i
12 the stored spent fuel from a reactor site, transportation and 13 ultimate disposition by the DOE. " Since the NRC is now:in the 14 process of licensing this cask for storage only, and it is not 15 compatible with any offsite transport system it is again n 16 violation.
E 17 Furthermore, in their comments for DOE's Final 18 Version Dry Cask Storage Study, the NRC made this statement:
19 "The Commis'sion is concerned that inadequate attention is i
20 being given to ensure the compatibility of the various steps
~
l 21 in the storage, transport and disposal of spent fuel and 22 thereby enhance the' safety and efficiency of fuel' handling."
l 23 Noting their concern with the proliferation of
- l 1
24 storage options the Commission recommended,
"... system i
25 analysis and action at this early stage could result in
(
1 ANN.RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
j
-Court Reporters J
1612 K-Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950 t
~
~ ~ ~
29 1
minimizing these handling risks. " The VSC-24 cask contradicts 2
_this policy position on the part of the NRC.
It only adds to 3
the lack of standardization and integration of the whole waste 4
system since it is not compatible with any other. storage 5
system or transport method.
This will increase the 6
possibility of' handling accidents, public exposure, and will-7 escalate the cost.
Through a cost / benefit analysis in a 8
hearing we can determine how much more costly this system will 9
ultimately be.
10 There is no monitoring of this cask system, so that 11 if pressures or excessive temperatures are building up they 12 could not be detected in time.
This is in violation of NRC's 13 rules on dry cask confinement systems which states, and the 14 Attorney General mentioned this before, " Storage confinement 15 systems must have the capability of continuous monitoring in 16 a manner such that the licensee will be able to determine when 17 corrective action needs to be taken to maintain safe storage 18 conditions."
19 Only a public hearing can further explore the need-20 for monitoring and make a determination of what is needed to 21 protect the public and the environment.
22 Consumers Power's comments to the NRC during this 23 rulemaking on the cask indicate that they do not have the kind 24 of fuel that was specified in their Certificate of Compliance 25 which has been approved for use in the casks at Palisades.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950 rw1
.30 1
It is difficult to believe that the NRC does not know what 2
kind ef-fuel it is licensing a cask for, but that seems' to be 3
the case here.
Any approval given by the NRC would have to 4
be site " specific and not generic and therefore, this would-5 require a hearing.
6 The 'NRC has failed to comply with the National 7
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 as amended, which requires 8
an Environmental Impact Statement for any federal action-9 affecting the quality of the human environment in a
10 significant way not already considered.
The adoption of this 11 rule to use the VSC-24 could lead to the adoption of this cask 12 nationwide.
Therefore, an environmental impact statement is 13 imperative.
14 There is a
good example of why having
.no 15 environmental impact statement drawn is a serious defect on 16 the part of the NRC.
The first sentence of the detailed 17 response to the Attorney General Frank Kelley, in his request 18 for hearing from the Chairman of the NRC, Ivan Selin, states 19 that the NRC has adopted a procedure for using the. general 20 license of a utility for storage of spent fuel at a. reactor 21 site, which mean allowing the project to go forward without' 22 a public hearing, because the safety of cask technology.is 23 not dependent on site specific conditions.
24 This statement is based on. a false premise, since..
25 one of the important site specific conditions at Palisades and ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
31 1
the Great Lakes area is the impact of the freeze-thaw i
2 envircement of the severe winters in the Midwest on the 3
integrity of concrete.
There is a good deal of information 4
on these" impacts on concrete in the literature which could be 5
brought forward in a hearing.
6 In addition, the Department of Energy's Final Dry 7
Cask Storage Study states that a potential _ safety issue, 8
"...is the structural integrity of concrete at the 9
temperatures expected in the cask."
10 Another-site-specific aspect of the Lake Michigan 11 environment, which the NRC failed to consider, is the heavy 12 amount of moisture in the form of fog, rain, mist, sleet and 13 ice storms and snow, that are prevalent here.
In discussing 14 the effects of corrosion on the metal canister intended for 15 the VSC-24, a report from Pacific Nuclear states:
"It is 16 concluded that radiation, especially that from gamma emitters,-
17 potentially has some deleterious effect upon corrosion rates 18 on the occasions if the canister becomes wet and remains wet 19 for some time during the storage period."
20 The NRC has not addressed these safety' issues during 21 their rulemaking procedures because they don't even recognize 22 them.
These matters would be brought to their attention in 23 a hearing'.
c 24 The Chairman of the NRC, Ivan Selin, has stated that i-25 Palisades is perhaps the next plant that will have to e shut I
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
32 1
down because of an embrittlement problem in its pressure 2
vessel-- A cost / benefit analysis in a hearing could determine 3
the extent of the embrittlement problem and how soon that 4
plant may have to be shut down.
It may be more cost effective 5
to shut the plant down now rather than create another nuclear 6
waste dump on the shore of Lake Michigan in addition to the 7
wastes that are in the spent fuel pool.
An environmental 8
impact statement requires the consideration of. alternatives 9
to the impending action.
10 We go to further discrepancies in the way this cask 11 system has been designed and produced.
The NRC has not 12 accepted the results of the tests that have been run at the 13 Idaho Engineering facility on a small prototype [e of this 14
- cask, the VSC-17, because of concerns that calculated 15 temperatures are too close to the accident conditions in both 16 the interior metal basket and the concrete cask, as I've 17 mentioned previously.
18 However, the vendor did accept the test results of 19 the VSC-17 and proceeded to build the casks on site before 20 the certificate of compliance by the NRC was issued and they 21 were built with NRC approval. There's a letter from Gunderson 22 that's specifically says that thelNRC is not accepting the 23 test results of the VSC-17 but the vendor has, in constructing 24 the cask.
25 We need to explore how this discrepancy in applying 1
i
\\
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters l
1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950 1
33 1
the test data to the casks, that have been constructed, will 2
affect the capacity of the cask. to perform their intended 3
function.
~
4 The Final Rule published on July 18th, 1990 states:
5 "The NRC will ensure that each cask is fabricated under. an 6
NRC-approved quality assurance program."
However, as was 7
pointed out previously, the eight casks now onsite were 8
constructed before the NRC has issued a certificate of 9
compliance, and five casks were built before the NRC conducted 10 an inspection last Spring.
The NRC Inspectors found that a i
11 number of welds were missing, that the workers were not aware 12 that certain work had to meet construction codes, that they 13 did not know what those codes were, and that the management 14 oversight was very weak.
And so Consumers Power Company was 15 required to shut down construction on the casks as a result.
16 Now, we have no indication that the-five casks that 17 were already built under substandard conditions, that did not 18 pass the NRC inspection, will not be used, and what will 19 happen to them?
We need to have this determined through a.
20 hearing.
21 Further questions about the construction and safety 22 of these casks comes from a letter from Pacific Nuclear to Mr.-
23 Haughney of the NRC, a company that was initially involved in 24 the construction but which now wants to distance itself from 25 the project.
Mr. Shingleton, a vice-president of the Pacific-I ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-39E0
34 C
1 Nuclear states:
"On December 31,
- 1991, Pacific Nuclear completed a divestiture of all interest and participation in 2
3 Pacific Sierra Nuclear Associates.
As a result of this 4
divestitf.1re Pacific Nuclear now has no ownership of,.or 5
relationship to the Pacific Sierra Nuclear, including the 6
ventilated storage cask design."
7 It is obvious that the divestiture is related to any 8
liability or negligence issues that may surface in the future 9
with this cask, and probing the reasons for this action can 10 only come about in a public hearing.
11 Another comment questioning the safety of this 12 system comes from the B and W Fuel Company.
They pointed out 13 that the NRC staff failed to identify a significant safety-14 issue, that is, that the closure welds of the interior metal 15 basket holding the fuel are not sufficient to ' meet the 16 structural strength requirements of. an ASME Section III-17 pressure vessel, We need to probe this claim with expert 18 witness in a hearing.
j 19 The Final Rule of July 18, 1990, states:
"There is 20 a possibility that the use of a certified cask at a particular i
21 site may entail the need for a site-specific licensing action.
J 22 For example, an evaluation under 10 CFR 50.59 for a new cask 23 loading procedure could require a Part 50 license amendment 24 in a particular case.
In'this event the usual formal hearing 25 requirements would apply."
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006--
1 (202) 293-3950
t 35 1
Now, a "new loading procedure" is exactly what we 2
have wtth this VSC-24 cask with a great deal of new equipment 3
that has had to be developed for the loading of this 4
exceptionally large cask.
The NRC should have evaluated this 5
procedure under 10 CFR 50.59 and required an amendment for the 6
use of this ec[uipment that would ' have allowed for public.
7 review and they have failed to do so.
8 The description of the surveillance requirements 9
should, of itself, cause reason for concern.
We find the 10 following in the Safety Evaluation Report:
"A visual 11 surveillance, a drive-by or walk through examination, of the 12 exterior of the air inlets and outlets should be conducted at 13 an interval not to exceed one week.
14 Now, further down on the same page we find the 15 following:
A conservative analysis of a complete blockage of 16 all air inlets and outlets indicates that the concrete can 17 reach accident temperature limits of 350 degrees Fahrenheit, 18 in a time period between 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> and one week.
19 This is a serious contradiction in the evaluation 20 of safety of this type of surveillance.
In addition, these 21 casks will stand 18 feet high on a concrete pad, and 22 therefore, the mode of surveillance required will make it 23 impossible to view the top 12 to 14 feet-of the cask vents.
1 24 Besides this weak surveillance, the lack of any 25 monitoring system for this cask has been the subject of I
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 R
i
-36 1
concerned comment by numerous persons with in the nuclear 2
industry as well as the University of Wisconsin Radioactive 3
Review Board.
For example, this Board wrote:
"The importance 4
.of heat transfer mechanism to overall cask performance 5
requires that all reasonable monitoring requirements, not 6
simply visual' surveillance, be ' utilized to ' ensure the t
7 appropriate performance of the cask."
8 Numerous other comments from within the nuclear 9
industry indica $ e various reasons why this is a substandard 10 cask compared to.others that the NRC has licensed.
Each of 11 these concerns should be probed for their validity in a public 12 hearing.
13 I must make one final, regrettable, observation.
14 The NRC rule states that if the emergency plan is in 15 compliance with NRC regulation, then the utility does not have 16 to notify either state or local governments before beginning 17 to load the casks.
Yet, the essence of any emergency plan.is 18 to make sure that local services, such as the sheriff and 19 police departments and hospital services, know what is going 20 on and know how to respond if necessary.
It would appear that 21 the NRC is encouraging a covert operation in nuclear waste 22 disposal that might be harmful to people, 23 These are only some of the major issues that 24 surround the VSC-24 cask system that should be addressed ~in 25 a public hearing and cannot.be resolved through a public ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD; Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite'300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
37 1-meeting of this kind.
2 In the next few days I plan to submit questions on 3
the possibility of combustible gases being generated within 4
the cas k's and the effects of pinhole leaks in the fuel 5
cladding within the cask.
6 Albert Einstein was not only a brilliant scientist 7
whose work foreshadowed the fission process, but also a 8
visionary philosopher, and he said, "We have fissioned the i
9
- atom, and all things have changed, except our mode.of 10 thinking, and thus we drift to unparalled catastrophes."
11 We need to rethink our approach to nuclear waste 12 disposal or this nation will soon find itself engulfed in 13 these "unparalled catastrophes".
14 I thank you for your time and the attention that you 15 may give these issues.
16 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY: Thank you Dr. Sinclair for 17 your excellent remarks.
18 I have one caveat here.
We only have this room for 19 another hour and 20 minutes and many people want to speak.
20 So, we would hope that you can confine yourself to the time 21 allotted and to the time we have remaining.
22 Speaking for five minutes is a woman noted for her 23 dedication to our environment.
She will be speaking, not only 24 on her own behalf, but as a representative of the Michigan-25 Environmental Defense.
I would like to call on now Ms. Ellen f'
ANN RILEY F ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20006
-(202) 293-3950
?
38 1
Beal to speak.
2 Ms. Beal.
3 MS. BEAL:
Well, my throat's not really cooperating-4 with me this morning, so I can assure you I will try to be
.i 5
brief.
Attor'ney General Kelley, Mr. Bernero, members of the 6
7 NRC, I appreciate this opportunity to address you this morning 8
on this most serious environmental issue facing the citizens 9
of Michigan.
4 10 My name is Ellen Beal and I serve as a Legislative 11 Director for Michigan Environmental Defense, a citizen based i
t 12 environmental group dedicated to the preservation of 13 Michigan's fragile ecosystem. We represent over 8,000 members 14 throughout lower Michigan.
15 I'm here this morning to urge you to follow an open 16 public process in developing policy regayding the siting of 17 temporary high-level radioactive waste storage in concrete 18 casks along the shores of Lake Michigan.
If the nuclear 19 industry, in conjunction with the Congress, were to propose-20 a high level radioactive waste repository be constructed 21 within the Great Lakes Watershed Basin, the citizens of this 22 State would fill an auditorium 100 times the size of this room 23 to demand a voice in the process.
And yet, the utilities _have-24 been given approval to create what is, in fact, de facto high--
25 level waste disposal less than 200 yards from the Lake ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
E 39-1 Michigan shoreline without even one public hearing.
2 There has been no environmental impact statement,-
3 no cost / benefit analysis, and there are no plans to move the 4
waste wheh and if a high level waste repository ever becomes 5
operational.
6 I appreciate your willingness to listen to public 7
comment at this time.
However, in addition to my position 8
with MED I have also served as a local elected official for 9
the past six years.
In creating new policies for the City of 10 Lansing, our rules require a public hearing:first, in order s
11 to allow the citizens to give testimony.
We must take into 12 account their concerns and desires as we are developing that 13 policy.
14 It would that this public meeting has been convened i
15 only after the fact in an effort to placate critics.
Indeed i
16 Consumers Power has already been done to construct the cask.
17 This is not the way policy should be promulgated -in a 18 democratic society.
Especially when it is the citizen, the 19 rate payer who will be expected to pay for this environmental 20 folly.
21 I'd like to pose a few questions to you at this 22 time.
Several, I think, were already brought forth by_the-23 Attorney General, so I will try to be brief.
24 The first one is, what is the time line for retiring 25 and mothballing Palisades and Big Rock nuclear plants?
- Two, ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 I
40.
what are the projections for a new generation of nuclear power 1
2 plantsr, what kind of technology will be utilized, and eaere 3
will the waste be disposed of?
~
4 Three, what are the plans for transporting the waste-5 stored in dry cask, how will it be moved and what is the time 6
line for removal?
7 Four, and you already spoke to this, regarding the-8 status of the development of the Yucca Mountains site in.
9 Nevada.
My question is:
What contingency plans exist in the 10 event that the Yucca Mountain site proves to be unsuitable for 11 high-level waste dinposal?
12 And five, this is a question generated by the l
13 statement by Mr. Bernero in regards to the life span of these 14 proposed cask storage.
And that is:
on what basis do you 15 make the assertion that these casks will maintain their 16 structural integrity for 100 years?
Has this containment 17 system been tested 'for this length of time?
Has it been 18 tested under Michigan's climate conditions taking into account 19 continuous freezing and thawing' cycles?
20 The weight of the evidence would suggest that all-21 projections regardir.g the safety and. longevity of nuclear 22 facilities have beer; hopelessly optimistic.
One example I 23 would point to is the waste isolation pilot project. in New 24 Mexico, where scientists believed that the facility would i
+
25 remain bone dry, I believe, for about 10,000 years, and water ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite'300 i
W&shington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
41 1
- was discovered leaking into that facility within a ten year 2
span. ~I think you could also point to the Savannah River 3
- plant, the Palisades
- plant, in-terms of embrittlement 4
problems,' and certainly the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in 5
Washington State, think has generated very serious problems 6
that have become apparent long before the scientific community 7
felt they would be.
8 I think it would appear that despite the industry's 9
optimism about a hundred year life span for these casks, our 10 experience has proved otherwise time and time again.
11 The public has waited for 40 years for the Federal 12 Government to solve the radioactive waste problem.
During 13 that time we have become better educated on the effects of 14 radiation exposure on human health and the environment.
At 15 the same time government credibility has been strained time 16 and time again.
We will not accept short term inadequate solutions which are driven by economics and a desire to expand 17 18 nuclear power.
We insist that the health and safety of our 19 citizens as well as that of future ganerations, be given top 20 priority in the consideration of high level nuclear waste 21 disposal.
22 Despite the best efforcs of the nuclear industry to 23 present a glowing picture of success, all economic and 24 environment indicators point to a planned phase out of nuclear 25 power.
If the Federal Government want citizen cooperation in l-I ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 t
[.
42
'l-planning high level waste disposal, then let's move _toward 2
eliminating the generation of more waste and work together to 3
clean up the mess that has already been created.
4 I thank you.
5 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
Thank you, Ms. Beal.
6 Our next presenter, speaking for five minutes, 7
representing the Palisades Watch Group, Ms. Kay Haffner.
8 MS. RAFFNER:
Good morning.
I want to'say_that my 9
statement here is incomplete and I will turn. in comments,.
10 written comments later.
11 I had some serious questions-about different parts 12 of the casks.
One is, there's a reference to the casks that 13 are already in -- that are already in use in Surry and other 14 places in the United States, and I have here before me,.it's 15 from September 30th, 1992, an NRC Inspection Report.
The 16 subject is the NRC Inspection Report, and it 's from -- I can ' t 17 read this writing.
Something that happens all the time with 18 this kind of stuff.
19 It was an inspection that included the review of 20 activities authorized of the Surry facility.
And in speaking 21
-- one of the areas inspected was the storage -- the_ dry fuel 22 storage pad and the casks.
It says, the licensee has written 23 a DR -- and I don't know what that is -- on recent conditions
~
24 discovered at the dry fuel storage pad.
Specifically recent-25 surveys indicated that the radiation dose rate at two meters ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
43 1
was greater than the cask tech spec limits of 10 milirems per 2
hour at-two meters distance.
Licensee determined that due'to 3
cask spacing on the pad, shine from the other cask caused an-4 erroneous reading.
The licensee's position is that the 5
surveillance requirement for measuring dose as L'
after-6 loading, and d'oes not require periodic remeasuring.
Those 7
dose rate at the fence is required to be performed en a.
l 8
quarterly frequency and was found to be acceptable.
9 Another problem documented on the DR was that cask 10 contamination of four-thousandths disintegrate par minute per 11 100 cubic meters squared was noted on one of the casks, cask 12 V 21500.
Measuring of contamination levels is also on an L 13 frequency and not required on periodic frequency.
- However, the licensee believes that the increasing contamination is due 14 15 to paint _ flaking from the outside of the cask.
The licensee is correcting this specific problem and trying to determine 16 17 if paint flaking is caused by heat.
18 Well, I have some big questions here.
If -- this 19 happens to be the most toxic stuff that we know on the face of the earth, an it's not just one toxic substance, it's many, 20 21 many toxic substances.
Pretty deadly stuff.
And for it not 22 to be measured on a continuous basis is just outrageous.
They o
23 measured on
- loading, and after that they're measuring 24 quarterly.
What kind of sense does that give if a cask if 25 leaking?
And furthermore, I have questions about the paint, I
I ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
l Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
~.
t
.I 44 1
because it's our understanding that the paint is to protect 2
against-reactions, chemical reactions and corrosion of.the i
3 cask itself.
~
4 Now, if this paint flaking is caused by heat and the.
5 paint is coming off, at:d you're getting:some high' doses'at 6
that cask, how are you going to get employees up there to i
7 repaint it without getting some high doses to those employees, 8
to workers?
L 9
In the license for the Calvert Cliff project the NRC 10 would allow fuel rods with pinhole leaks to go into the NUHOMS 11 canisters, and opponents want to know how many pinhole leaks.
12 I guess I'd like to know, first of all, how you measure 13 pinhole leaks, because that's never been properly explained 14 to us, and we have asked.
4 L
15 But secondly, we'd like to know if that's the case 16 with our cask as well, that pinhole leaks are going.to be 17 allowed in.
The other thing is, how do you not allow them in 18 because these things break down with time and there's no way.
19 to keep them from breaking down with time.
Nobody has 20 perfected that yet.
So you're not going to keep that out of 21 there.
22 Please bear with me.
23 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
You have one minute.
24 MS. HAFFNER:
One minute?.Okay.
Then I will offer 25 more written.
/
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
45 1
_One thing is that'we have concerns about some of the 2
radiatTon'that comes through out of the spent fuel.
One of
~
3 those is Krypton, Krypton 85.
If Krypton reaches -- and this 4
is Krypton releases out_in the air.
If Krypton releases --
5 this is.from a book called the Pet Cow Effect, it says that 6
if the Krypton reaches even one percent of-the maximum 7
permissible concentration in the air, 300 nanocuries per meter r
8 cubed, measurable global changes in electric conditions of the 9
atmosphere will begin to occur, according to W.
L.
Beck.
10 Chairman of the Krypton 85 working-Group of the. International 11 Commission on Atmospheric Electricity, and this was known in 12 1975.
13 For
- instance, the electrical conductivity immediately_ over the oceans would be increased by 43 percent, 14 15 electrical resistance between the surface of the earth or the 16 water and the ionosphere would be reduced, and it might be 17 possible for lightning bolts in widely separated regions to 18 be connected by electrical feedback.
This may cause 19 unexpected changes in the weather.
20 And the French have issued a Katinum(ph) report 21 issued by the French Nationwide Power Company, EDF --
22 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
Your time is up,-ma'am.
23 MS. HAFFNER:
Well, thank you.
24 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
The next person to speak 25 representing the Coalition for a Nuclear Free Great Lakes, 4
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street,.N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
i 46 1
speaking for five minutes, Mr. Michael Keegan.
2 MR. KEEGAN:
Thank you.
I ' d. 1ike to thank the 3
Attorney General and'the NRC for this opportunity for a public 4
forum, btit I would like to add that this.is just a beginning' 5
because we have had great difficulty communicating to the NRC.
Back "in August of 1990 I was one 'of' 61 parties which 6
7 requested to intervene at the Palisades Nuclear Power Plant 8
concerning the storage of this waste.
Sixty-one parties 9
intervened and at that time there was going to be an 10 opportunity for a public hearing.
Soon after Consumers Power 11 withdrew their request and stated that they would be going 12 under a generic ruling by the NRC.
For that intervention and-l 13 that opportunity I prepared a statement and that statement I
14 pretty much stands today.
15 The Coalition-for Nuclear Free Great Lakes is a 16 coalition of environmentalists and anti-nuclear people groups 17 from eight states and three provinces, and these are our L
18 concerns:
I 19 There are major population centers near Van Buren 20 County that will be impacted by an accident or ruptured or dry 21 cast concrete at the Palisades site. These population centers
'}
22 include; Evanston, Illinois; Chicago, Illinois; Gary, Indiana; 23 South
- Bend, Indiana; St.
- Joseph, Michigan; Kalamazoo,
{
24 Michigan; South Haven, Michigan; Holland, Michigan; Grand-25 Rapids,. Michigan; Muskegon, Michigan.
t ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
I Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950 r
47.
1 The placement of spent fuel from the containment or spentTuel pool at Palisades into an unproven and questionable 2
3 technology warrants comprehensive public review.
This
~
4 material is lethal.
And in a democracy the persons at risk-5 must have a voice in the disposition 'of these-lethal i
6 materials.
7 Lake Michigan takes decades' to flush into Lake Huron 8
and hundreds of years for the flushing of these waters out 9
through the St.. Lawrence Seaway.
When these waters are 10 contaminated with radioactivity with the half lives associated
11 with spent fuel, over 20 percent of the world's surface fresh t
12 water would be lost.
These stakes are too high to be.
13 considered an acceptable risk.
The hydrology of the Great 14 Lakes must be examined and explored and take precedence over 15 any financial gains which might be made or saved by private 16 interests.
17 The economy of Michigan relies heavily.on tourism.
18 and sports fishing.
The land and the water of the State of 19 Michigan are at high risk of irreparable damage due to the 20 operation of nuclear power ' facilities.
The deliberate 21 placement of spent nuclear fuel into dry' storage concrete cask 22 is a decision which must have full public input.
This 23 decision will impact the publ at least.three states. The 9
24 communities along the eastern shore of Lake Michigan rely -
25 heavily on tourism and sports fishing.
A decision to place ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.'
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
48 i
spent nuclear fuel near the shores of Lake Michigan will certatTrly undermine their economies.
'I 2
3 The imo commissioned. a study from the Sandia Labs 4
which wa's to provide an assessment of'a worse case accident-5 at each US nuclear power plant. The 1982 study concluded that 6
there would be $52.6 billion -- this is 1980 dollars -- of 7
damage at Palisades, 13,000 deaths due to cancer would occur.
8 These figures were developed with the nuclear fuel from 9
Palisades was within rm in depth containment.
Storage of 10 spent' nuclear fuel near the shores of Lake Michigan would be 11 at considerably higher risk than an in depth containment.
12 The containment of dry storage concrete casks must 13 be scrutinized in full public view.
The economies of three 14 states and hundreds of communities would be placed in-15 jeopardy.
These questions must be considered in the light of 16 day and the public has every right to be party to these 17 discussions in a democracy.
18 For these aforementioned reasons the Coalition for 19 Nuclear Free Great Lakes requested public hearings in the 20 above notice of procedures.
21 In Wisconsin there is a cost / benefit analysis under 22 way.
There is no cost / benefit analysis taking place in the 23 State of Michigan.
In April of 1992, Dr. Ivan Selin, Chair 24 of the NRC, stated in the New York Times, that Palisades was 25 likely the next plant to be shut after Yankee Row due to ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
49 1
embrittlement.
2 We're looking at a plant that does not have much of.
3 a life extension left, yet we,are prepared -- you are prepared 4
to store nuclear fuel on the shore to extend that brief life.
~
5
-The citizens of the State of Michigan should not be 6
straddled with that economic burden.
There has been no-7 environmental impact statement.
What has been offered is a 8
generic ruling on an environment assessment, an in-house study 9
done which says that there's going to be no problems here.
\\
10 They did not take a look at the Lakes, they did not take a 11 look at the protected dunes area, they did not take into 12 consideration the environment.
13 Assuming that the cask would hold up, we have heard 14 much testimony today that suggests that these casks will not is hold up.
What will happen to the environment of Michigan.
16 A full environmental impact statement is,needed.
17 MR. SCHEARBARTH:
Mr. Keegan, could you summarize la in a few seconds, please?
19 MR. KEEGAN:
Yes.
The decisions that are going to 20 take place over the next few months should be made with 21 geologic time in consideration.
This is 20 percent of the 22 world's surface fresh water.
Two years ago this nation went 23 to war over oil, a precious resource.
Just imagine if 20 24 percent of the world's surface fresh water was contaminated 25 by radiation.
't ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
i
-50 1
For these reasons the Coalition for' Nuclear Free 2
Gre at -"" Lake s requests and demands public hearings, a full i
environmental impact statement, a cost / benefit analysis, which 3
includes a full economic analysis,.and we would like to see 4
5 these items done before we proceed with any decision on this 6
matter.
7 Thank you.
8 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
Thank you, sir.
Now, we 9
will call upon the president of the Palisades Park Homeowners Association, that's at Palisades Park, Michigan,. speaking for 10 11 five minutes, Mr. Tom Flynn.
12 Mr. Flynn.
13 MR.
FLYNN:
Good morning.
I'd like to thank 14 Attorney General Frank Kelley and his staff who are making 15 this public meeting
- possible, but I
think even more 16 importantly insisting on a full public hearing. and the' 17 protection and benefits that avails Michigan citizens.
I.
18 would also like to thank the NRC for coming to Lansing and-19 hearing about our concerns.
20 I'm the president of a community called Palisades 21 Park.
We' re a very historic community, probably fourth, fif th 22 generation of residents who have enjoyed this very historic 23 and unique section of land, I think commonly referred to as 24 the covert dunes, one of the most unique land formations 25 anywhere in the world on fresh water.
i ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202). 293-3950
i 51 1
I represent about 200 owners, property. owners.
2 PopulaE on swel.;s to about 2,000 in the summer.
We are 3
Consumer Power's closest neighbor.
We're literally 'in 'one
~
4 another's back yard.
5 I'd like to point out that our members are n'either l
6 anti-nuclear or environment activists.
But, very importantly 7
we have very serious and grave' concerns about'the licensing 8
of the dry storage cask and the ramifications.
I'd also'like 9
to acknowledge that despite many safety incidents.that have 10 occurred at the plant, the embrittlement question that's been 11 raised here today, that we're all very keenly aware of.
12 Consumers Power has attempted to be a very good 13 neighbor to us.
They've gone out of their way, they put.a 14 warning system amongst-our homes and I
would like to 15 acknowledge that because that has been evident over the 25 16 years.
Again, we've been there since 1905.
17 To the NRC, you're talking about a generic licensing 18 of this technology, but very site specific as homeowners were 19 keenly aware of the volatility of the Michigan dunes.
We have 20 very serious weather issues in all seasons of the year, and 21 I think it's important to note that site specific, it's a key i
22 consideration.
23 Our major concern is the de facto permanent storage 24 that no one's been able to answer to our satisfaction; that 25 once.these are loaded that they won't be there -- what really I
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20006
-(202) 293-3950
s2 1-constitutes permanent storage on the Lake.
This is also the 2
.1990's7 'I think the NRC addressed it earlier, but, I'think 3
there are far more surveillance safeguards, instrumentation 4
and those kinds of things.
It seems to_be a fairly crude 5
technology.
6 And lastly, I think'a lot of times Consumers has 7
recognized this is a national problem, it's not theirs, and it's been pointed out by the gentleman from NRC today.
- But, 8
9 if we can't get a long term permanent solution, I mean the-10 practical response is, let's quit generating the waste that 11 we have no permanent or long term solution to handle.
I think it's unconscionable to move forward without a public hearing, 12 13 because once there is injury it's irreversible, and so why 14 hasten to do this without a
full public-hearing and environment impact statement that's been requested here today.
15 16 Twenty-five years from now if something, does go wrong the 17 question will be asked, whose watch was it, on whose watch did 18 this happen, and I think really it's.important to slow down 19 and do the proper work as sensible people, to assure safety 20 for our citizens.
21 Thank you.
22 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
Thank you, sir.
Next-23 speaker represents the citizens for Alternatives to Chemical 24 Contamination, from Redford,
- Michigan, speaking for five 25 minutes, Mr. Harold Stokes.
(
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
. ~.
l 53-1 Mr. Stokes.
2 MR. STOKES:
I thank you, Attorney General Kelley, 3
and your crew and also the NRC for showing up here and hearing 4
our comments.
5 I'm a member of the CACC Board, which is. the Citizens for Aiternatives to Chemical Contamination, and I've 6
7 been asked by our Director, Ann Hunt, to read this statement 8
to you.
Ann Hunt is also a Great Lakes United director-at-9 large.
r 10 Quoting Ann Hunt:
"I am speaking to you today on behalf of Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical Contamination,.
11 i
12 also known as CACC, a grass roots environmental education and 13 an advocacy organization with members throughout the - Great 14 Lakes Basin.
We are proud to inform you that many of the 15 persons speaking
- today, including governmental 16 representatives, are members of CACC.
17 As our name states we' are devout believers that one 18 must closely examine the alternatives in order to avoid 19 irrevocable contamination.
The process by which the decision d
20 was made to allow the construction and loading of dry casks j
21 on the shores of Lake Michigan has failed to look closely at 22 the alternatives.
Without a
full environmental ' impact 23 statement disclosing the basin wide implications of this.
24 action a complete examination.of the alternative, an analysis 25 of cost versus benefits and a worse case scenario, will never ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950 t.
+,.
n
54 1
be a part of the Cecision.
2 CACC acknowledges the efforts of the Attorney 3
General of Michigan, Frank Kelley, for his efforts to upgrade 4
this assembly to a full public hearing with the weight and 5
importance that it deserves.
Through the effects of Mr.
6 Kelley and his staff we can present our testimony today 7
knowing that it will at least be acknowledged by the Nuclear i
8 Regulatory Commission and that issues brought forward will be.
9 responded to in the decision document.
It is unfortunate, 10 however, that NRC Chair, Dr. Ivan Selin is unable to heed his 11 own words of November 17th, 1992 before the American Nuclear-
'2 Society and the European Nuclear Society:
13
'The nuclear industry and perhaps nuclear regulaters 14 as well have sometimes acted as though public participation is were a necessary evil rather than a positive source in NRC 16 processes.
I think that such an attitude though readily 17 understandable is short sighted.
First the interested public 18 often does have a valuable substance contribution to make.
19 Moreover, a process from which tte public ic shut out is a 20 process in which the public will 1. ave no confidence.
It is 21 all too tempting for engineers and scientists to believe that A
22 decisions about complicated technical questions should be lef t 23 to the experts.
But like it or not public credibility cannot 24 be achieved without public participation.'
25 CACC urges Dr. Selin to remember his own words and ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
55' 1
establish a public hearing for the proposal to construct and 2
fill 7ry cask with nuclear. waste.
The citizens -of 3
Southwestern Michigan, as well as residents of the entire 4
basin deserve no less.
5 I am also speaking today as a member of the Board 6
of Directors of Great Lakes
- United, a
coalition of 7
environmental organizations, organized labor, conservation 8
groups, and concerned citizens for both Canada and_ the United 9
States.
Great Lakes United works.to support the conditions 10 of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement which in part 11 states, a goal of the virtual elimination of persistent toxic 12 substances in the Great Lakes ecosystem.
There can be no more 13 persistent toxic substance than high-level radioactive waste 14 from spent fuel at nuclear power plants.
q 15 The existence of 37 operating nuclear reactors in 16 the Great Lake basin, all of which are located on the Great 17 Lakes, half in the United States and half in Canada, was of 18 concern to the International Joint Commission Science Advisory 19 Board in their 1991 report.
The report states:
With the 20 aging of plants and equipment two issues emerge; the approach 21 of the designed life of the plant and the accumulation of high 22 level radioactive nuclear fuel as waste on site.
The issue 23 of a long term solution for waste storage must be addressed 24 if a legacy problem for the Great Lakes is to be avoided.
The 25 Board concludes that there is a need to address a bi-national 9
i ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
~56' 1
energy policy for the Great Lakes basin with a view to the 2
ecologTeal implications of the various options, including 3
conservation.
4 Nuclaar energy and fossil fuel options should be 5
reevaluated to ac. :ess the ecological implications relative to 6
the Great Lakes basin ecosystem.
Together with the issues'of-7 risk assessment and risk perception.
8 Great Lakes United urges the NRC to fully examine 9
the potential impact of siting high-level radioactive waste 10 storage containers on the shores of the Great Lakes. Although 11 it is too late to prevent the siting of the 37 reactors we can 12 act sensibly in evaluating potential waste-storage 'and.
i 13 disposal options.
14 Put out a full environmental impact statement which 15 takes'into account all of the existing reactors as potential 16 aites for dry cask storage.
The Great Lakes ecosystem 17 continues to be an unknown risk.
18 We are not talking about a minor body of water here, 19 but rather the sources of drinking water for millions of 20 people, which have been alluded to, of course, before.
The 21 consequences of the failure of contamination to function as it is designed would put the health of the basin's residence, 22 23 both human and wildlife, in danger for centuries.
24 Until both the public participation process is 25 completed in an open and full manner and a
complete ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950 w
w
,r
k
-57 1
environmental assessment of the impact of this proposal on the 2
Great takes basin'is completed, neither CACC no_r Great' Lakes 3
United ' will relax their many concerns over this plan to 4
construct and load cask with high-level nuclear waste on the 5
shores of the Great Lakes.
P 6
Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments on this proposal, and a special thanks to Attorney General Kelley 7
for making it clear to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,. that 8
9 this issue is of grave importance to the people-of the State.
10 Sincerely, Ann Hunt, Executive Director of CACC and Great 11 Lakes United, director-at '.arge."
12 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
Thank you, Mr. Stokes.
13 I'm going to ask the remaining speakers to make sure.
14 that they tailor their time as much as possible' so that 15 everyone will have an opportunity to speak.
16 Now speaking for the Kalamazoo River Protection 17 Association, Mr. Dayle Harrison.
18 MR. HARRISON:
Attorney Kelley, visiting members 19 from the NRC, certainly I hope you folks come back and see us 20 again, and we would like to also include the Department of-21 Energy directly in any further meetings and public hearings 22 down the road.
23 There was an interesting article in the Winter 24 edition of the Natural Resources and Environment put out by-25 the American Bar Association.
It talks about the sitting of 4
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
a
.58 1
some of these monitored retrieval storage facilities.
It 2
talks about a legacy of broken promises since' the event of the 3
nuclear age.
The US Government has promised to provide a
~
4 storage
- a safe storage for nuclear waste materials.
Forty 5
years we still don't have a site that's acceptable, we. don't 6
have any in the works.
So it appears that the contracts that 7
the Department of Energy has granted with the utilities is going to come to a head here relatively soon, I think in 1998, 8
9 and I'm not sure what the Department of Energy's plans are to 10 bring about further assurances.
11 But, I think the key to our concerns, The Kalamazoo River Protection Association, which is located, just for some 12 13 background, in Allegan County, and is also in Kalamazoo County 14 as well.
We have about 200 dues paying members.
Our concerns 15 go back again to the lack of information, lack'of completion 16 of an adequate environmental impact statement, both under the 17 National Environmental Policy Act and under Michigan's 18 Environmental Protection Act.
We would like to see an 19 environmental impact statement, at least a draf t, sent 'out and 20 accomplished within the next six months, and at that time we 21 would like to see a review, a public review of that document.
22 We want to focus primarily on the environmental 23 impacts and the alternatives that the NRC and the Department 24 of Energy can come up with to minimize the impacts of the 25 proposed action before this hearing today.
/
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) T.93-3950
.. _ ~.
59 1
We're puzzled why we continue to endanger the Great 2
Lakes without adequate information.
Certainly, given the 3
poisonous texture, the radioactive problem throughout the 4
nation, no one wants to have one of these sites.
Even the 5
bribes that were proposed, according to this article, to try 6
to get dif ferent communities in dif ferent states, the NRC and' 7
Department of Energy giving hand-outs to try to get people to 8
include these sites, have not been fruitful at all.
Almost 9
all the communities, including many Indian reservations have 10 declined to accept a generous offer.
Because they now 11 understand the issue and the greatness of the long term 12 impacts of siting any of these kind of nuclear waste 13 f acilities or waste facilities anywhere in the United States.
14 Great Lakes certainly is not the appropriate place to have it.
15 Certainly not within a few hundred feet of Lake Michigan.
16 So, I would urge the NRC and. the Department. of 17 Energy to take a more active role'in completing this adequate 18 environmental impact statement. I would urge Attorney General 19 Kelley -- I thank him certainly for his effort on behalf of.
20 the citizens of Michigan, and also the Great Lakes as well, 21 but I would urge you, Attorney General Kelley, to take 22 whatever means possible to assure that we protect the Great 23 Lakes.
24 Thank you.
25 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
Thank you, Mr. Harrison.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
60 1
Next speaker representing the Lake Michigan 2
Federation, speaking for five minutes, Ms. Tanya Cabala.
3 MS. CABALA:
My name is Tanya Cabala.
I am the
~
4 Michigan Director of the Lake Michigan Federation.
We're an 5
environmental non-profit organization with_ members in 6
My office is 7
located in Muskegon.
8 I thank the Attorney General's office for hosting 9
this meeting and for the opportunity to raise necessary and 10 critical questions regarding the VSC-24 dry cask storage 11 proposal for the Palisades Nuclear Power Plant.
We have 12 participated in the effort to find out -more about this me*. hod 13 of storage.
The effort that's been led by the superior 14 endeavors of Mary Sinclair and others, and we thank them for 15 their efforts to date to bring these questions to'the public, 16 where they should have been brought by Consumers Power, the 17 Public Service Commission and the Nuclear Regulatory 18 Commission.
19 The Lake Michigan Federation formed 23 years ago in 20 concern over plans to build nuclear power plants our Great 21 Lake.
Then, as now, the issue of how to adequately dispose 22 of spent fuel generated at nuclear power plants had yet to be 23 resolved.
We regard with increasing alarm the potential 24 development of permanent waste storage facilities on the shore 25 of Lake Michigan, and the accelerated rate by which new i
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
61 1
storage technologies are introduced without benefit of full 2
public review.
3 The US National Academy of Sciences have stated-4 that:
"Unlike the disposal of any other. type of waste the 5
hazard related to radioactive waste is so great that no 6
element of doubt should be allowed to exist regarding safety. "
7 There are serious doubts and questions about the 8
VSC-24 that need to be honestly answered.
Number one, once 9
and for all, is this temporary or permanent storage?
- Two, 10 what are the other alternatives to the VSC-24? Three, why has 11 the VSC-24 been chosen since it has not been tested before and 12 has been highly criticized, why has the cheapest alternative 13 been chosen?
What about questions regarding contractor 14 oversight in construction of the cask at Palisades?
Are the 15 casks structurally flawed? How many casks are planned?
Will 16 we line the shores with them from Palisades to Big Rock?
17 If future plans are for universal cask storage, 18 transport and disposal, why are we wasting time and money on 19 storage only casks?
Why has the public been left out?
The 20 only reason that this has come to public attention at all is 21 because of concerned citizens.
In addition we are expressly 22 disappointed at the latest round of public comment on the VSC -
23 24, much new, highly technical data was released to local 24 public document rooms.
Much of the material was illegible.
25 A rushed 30 days is not enough time in which to review such~
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Wa'shington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
62
-1 material.
2 Why did it take Consumers Pcwer so long to address 3
a spent fuel storage problem they had to know would eventually 4
become a" crisis? Are there other safety features of Palisades 5
operation that have been postponed to the last minute?
Time 6
for a full public review of storage options _should have been 7
built into this process.
What are the costs of rehandling and 8
restoring spent fuel?
Should the VSC-24 prove faulty after 9
implemented at Palisades?
How will the fuel be transported 10 to a Federal repository, and what will be the additional 11 handling costs associated with the removal? Why does the NRC 12 refuse to conduct a formal environmental impact statement on 13 dry cask storage and assess alternatives?
14 Our Northeast Wisconsin / Lake Michigan ' Federation 15 office has been granted intervener status to thoroughly 16 examine the VSC-24 dry cask proposed also at Point Beach, 17 Wisconsin.
We will employ our own staff, legal counsel, and 18 the services of Dr. Martin Resinkoff of Radioactive Waste 19 Management Associates of New York.
20 The VSC-24 will be independently reviewed and 21 compared with available dry cask alternatives. To be examined 22 will be any cask designed approved generically or s,d 23 specifically by the NRC and those currently under review by 24 the NRC.
The latter category will include any dual purpose 25 storage and transport or universal storage, transport and t
I ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
63 1
. disposal' designs if'available.
The Lake' Michigan Federation-2 will analyze the cost and benefits of the alternatives and 3
compare them with the proposed system which employs Pacific 4
Sierra Nuclear Associates VSC-24.
5 Why are we not doing this here where the'VSC-24 is 6
to be used the'very first time?
It is crucial that we have 7
safe, short term and long term storage.' facilities for these 8
wastes.
- However, short term storage does not solve. the 9
problem of nuclear waste.
It should allow for more careful 10 consideration of long term options, but should not be a.
11 license to create more waste to add to our already Lear crisis 12 storage situation.
13 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
Time is up.
14 MS.
CABALA:
Thank you for this opportunity to 15 express our views.
16 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
Thank you.
17 Next speaker representing CAP, the Citizens Against 13 Pollution, Mr. James H. Rilley, for five minutes.
19 MR. RILLEY:
I'm Jim Rilley, Lapeer County, former 20 Lapeer County Commissioner for four years, served on our 21 Environmental Committees.
- MAC, Michigan Association of 22 Counties, also NACO, National Association of Counties, and on 23 the National Steering Committee for the Environment.
Had 24 several occasions to talk on things of things of this nature.
25 I don't know really why I'm here, for the simply ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES,-LTD.
Court-Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006
-(202) 293-3950
t 64 1
reason I am a dairyman.
I milk cows 55 years.
That was my 2
life uTitil I inherited a landfill on my line fence.
Happens 3
to be the highest point of the thumb of Michigan, atop a glacial till laid down by the glacier, whereby artesian water 4
5 flows from all four directions at the rate of hundreds'of 6
thousands of gallons daily, and some of our State offices, 7
namely DNR, seen fit to use it as a depository for some of the 8
worse waste in North America, Berlin-Ferro, because they had i
9 so-called adequate clay in that area.
My farm happens to be 10 the very source of the Flint River, of the Cass River, of the 11 Black River.
And these type of atrocities being committed on 12 us as Americans?
13 All right.
This is a prime instance here that we're 14 dealing with Palisades, 300 feet from Lake Michigan.
Ninety 15 percent of the fresh water of North America exists here.
16 Nearly a quarter of the fresh water of planet earth exists-17 here, and we are going on a premise here of threatening this 18 very life blood of planet earth? As you look out in the stars 19 on a clear night and see the millions -- not millions, not 20 billions, trillions of stars and planets, and as far as we 21 know this is the only place we can exist.
And if there were 22 a place out there, how would we get there? Well, we got a few 23 rockets but they don't take very many people at one time.
We 24 got five billion people on the planet earth if we're vacate.
25 Now, enough of this, I want some questions answered; 1
ANN RILEY & ASSC,CIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
65 1
I got three of'them. 'Why aren't we conducting research.and 2
development on spent fuel waste usages rather than just 3
storage of 5,000 year half life?
Number two, why aren't we 4
providing incentives for alternative sources of energy.such 5
as solar, geothermal?
It's here for us.
Number three, why 6
aren't we mentioning the threat of earthquake and the 7
potential total devastation to this storage of this nuclear 8
waste 5,000 year half life?
9 I've got a little example of what happens by us not 10 considering this type of thing, for the simple reason Oscar 11 Frenette, WJR Detroit, put this scenario out in the year 1767 12 when the French were in control of Detroit.
This is a matter 13 of historical record.
An earthquake that was so devastating, 14 opened fissions in the earth, allowing volcanic gases to erupt 15 changing daylight into dark and the French used the rainwater 16 for ink.
17 We're proceeding with nuclear energy on the premise 18 of cheap energy.
In reality it can be the most expensive 19 source of energy if our very existence is threatened here on 20 the face of the earth.
We are proceeding in America in the 1
21 name of so-called progress and profit.
22 Thank you.
23 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
Thank you.
Next person 24 to speak representing Southwestern Michigan Greens, Mr.
25 Maynard Kaufman, for five minutes.
P ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
-Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
66 l
1 Is Mr.
Kaufman here?
If he's not here we'll--
2 continTe on.
3 Speaking for the Hillsdale Organization for the
~
4 Preservation of the Environment, Chairman, Mr. Richard Wunsch, 5
speaking for five minutes.
6 MR. WUNSCH:
Thank you, Mr. Attorney General, and 3
7 I would like to particularly thank you for having this meeting-l 8
and I hope you are successful in your efforts to have-a full 9
hearing.
10 I would also like to thank Mary Sinclair, Ellen 11 Beal, and the other half a dozen or so very reasonable people 12 that have spoken.
I don't really feel particularly 13 reasonable.
The organization of which.I am the Chair feel 14 that 3500 people to a public meeting, because of the fact that-15 Hillsdale County was the first County that was targeted as a potential low-level radioactive waste dump.
Now we are being 16 r
17 threatened with high-level waste for the State of Michigan and 18 we are being treated very shabbily.
19 I remember nuclear power as being too cheap ' to 20 meter.
I think many of the people in this audience are old 21 enough to remember that little shuck.
I also remember, as do 22 many of us here, probably all of us, many of the accidents 23 that have happened around the globe, the accidents will 24 happen.
25 Now, I spend much of my working life as a cement ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
k 67 1
finisher.
I am not able to converse about these engineering-2 detaibr, however I am very conversant with the fact that 3
concrete deteriorates in the State of Michigan.
And my
~
4 question is very simple:
What are.you going to do with this 5
- nonsense, with this junk?
Once the concrete that' is 6
containing it,'is gone, because it will' go,-maybe not today, 7
tomorrow, in ten years, but it will go.
Many of them will go 8
in 20 or 30 years.
9 By the way, Mary, you said you think -- it appears 10 to be a covert operation.
I would say it's a lead pipe cinch 11 it's a covert operation, because the working people of this 12 country, the ordinary citizens know how foolish'this is.
But' 13 we face the entire nuclear industry.
We face the NRC, we face 14 the weapons industry and we face the power industry.
All-15 using our money through taxes, the rate structure, et cetera.
16 So far you haven't killed the earth.
I hope that that 17 situation continues.
18 I would like to close with one little analogy, 19 story, whatever it might be.
You know, if the Egyptians had 20 been using nuclear power and were putting it in the pyramids, 21 which of course are a large part deteriorated, we don't even 22 know how they were built, much less what's in there, we would 23 oe carrying their waste for another couple of hundred thousand 24 years.
We would have taken that stuff one percent of the way.
25 toward being safe.
It will never happen.
It will never ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
68 1
-happen.
2 ATTORNEY G:INERAL KELLEY:
Thank you, Mr. Wunsch.
3 Now. we have nine people to speak individually.
~
4 They've'been allotted three minutes each.
So, if we stick to 5
your time very. closinly we'll finish on time by noon.
So
-t 6
please, keep your remarks to the three minutes allotted.
7 First spealter for three minutes, Joyce Westworth, 8
Lake Michigan Federat. ion.
It's Wentworth, I'm.sorry.
e 9
MS. WENTWOF.TH:
My questions regarding the VSC have 10 been taken care of by other people.
My real' concern is with 11 the pursuit of nuclear energy itself.
Dr.. Henry Kendall of 12 MIT called nuclear energy a dead end technology.
He said it 13 was originally promcited to be safe, cheap, and virtually-14 unlimited, and it has failed on all three counts.
He-also i
15 said that if the $20 billion in' subsidies were removed the 16 cost of nuclear energy would double.
17 When you combine that with the high. capital 18 investment required, as one person said, no sane capitalist-19 would invest in a nuclear plant today. When you combine those 20 factors with the fact. that we have not solved the' high level 21 radioactive waste prcblem, my question is, why do we continue 22 to pursue nuclear energy?
23 Recently as last year, Congressman Howard Wolpe 24 referred to a Departnent of Energy Office of Policy Internal 25 Study, that covered :.5 energy technologies without regard to ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
.m
69 1
political sensibilities.
It ranked nuclear energy as 15th in 2
the list, as the worst investment for payback for energy for 3
this country.
~
4 I'd just like that to be considered.
Thank you.
5 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
Thank you.
Now,'a member of the Don't Waste Michigan Chapter, 6
7 Harbor Springs, for three minutes, Mr. Dayle Scott.
8 MR. SCOTT:
Thank you very much.
A comment made by 9
a woman _here a minute ago about dry cask storage facilities 10 lining the beach from Palisades to Big Rock.
Brought to mind 11 a story told by a Odawa Elder from my area.
I live north of i
12 Petoskey, north of Harbor Springs.
Telling about the Fire 13 Councils they used to have in Cross Village, and at that time Native American camps would line the beaches all'the way from 14 15 Harbor Springs all the way to Good. Heart that's a. good 30.
16 miles -- and people would walk up.to have their Fire Council 17 at Cross Village, and that's quite a far cry from those' days,-
18 I realize.
19 But every day I drive to work along that 119, that 20 most beautiful stretch of Michigan highway and.look at that 21 Big Rock Power Plant over there and I realize that these casks 22 are marching in that direction.
23 My purpose in coming here today, as a representative -
24 of Don't Waste Michigan, the Northern Chapter, is to request 25 a public hearing on the appropriateness of the.use of ' dry l
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,-Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006
'(202) 293-3950
70 1
casks for the storage of radioactive waste.
In particular,
[
2 and in addition to answers to other questions, we request that 3
documentation be presented and placed in the public record at
~
a public hearing, showing that this method of dealing with the 4
5 ever growing stockpile of this highly toxic ' waste is less j
~
6 costly in financial and environmental health and safety. terms 7
then the obvious alternative of ceasing to make the waste.
i 8
Now, we request a balance sheet -- I'm sure you all 9
know what that is -- showing the real costs of choosing dry 10 cask storage, including construction costs, research and 11 development costs, the costs of monitoring these casks for a
.i 12 thousand years, the continued dollar losses incurred during i
13 the production of electricity. with nuclear power..
It is 14 common knowledge, I might add on that point, that Big Rock 1
15 Point loses -- which is owned by Consumers Power -- loses five 16 to seven million dollars a year making its product.
k 17 You should also include the cost of replacing these.
18 casks and transferring their contents on a 50 to a 100 year 19 rotation for a thousand years.
The cost of construction of i
20 more casks as more waste is created.
The cost of health care 21 associated with the past and continued worker and casual 22 exposure to additional human made radioactive waste.
The 23 difference also should be included in the ever increasing 24 estimated costs of the decommissioning at the planned date of 25 Palisades and Big Rock, for examples, at some time in the ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
)
71-1 future.
That should be compared with the cost of starting.
2 that decommissioning now.
3 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
Mr. Scott, cime is
~
4 up.
5 MR. SCOTT:
I'm just about through.
l 6
Pleas'e include all costs, including those incurred 7
by the US Government and the DOE and elsewhere; as well as 8
costs incurred by the private or public sector, the power t
9 plants, whether they be private or public.
Including costs i
10 to be included in or already included in the' sales or in the-11 rates paid by all rate payers.
12 As the other side of the balance sheet should show i
13 the cost of retraining displaced workers from shut down 14 nuclear plants in the technical areas involved in the 15 production of energy in small ways, and the production of -
16
- I'm kind of lost there.
17 But, I think you get the picture. We have virtually.
18
-- we can get rid of nuclear power and_save money.
I know 19 that for a fact.
You can ask Charlie McGinnis who's sitting 20 over there from Big Rock Point, and I think it's important 21 that we look at that balance sheet and I expect _to see.one at
~
22 the public hearing.
23 Thank you.
24 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
Thank you, Mr. Scott.
25
_ Our next speaker is from the Michigan Environmental.
/
ANN RILEY-& ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300
-Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950 i
o JL
+
v
b 72 1
Defense Group, Mr. nathan Mer er, for three minutes.
2 Mr. Mercer.
b 3
MR. MERCER:
I'd like to thank the Board from the
'l NRC for allowing us the time for comment today.
I thank you 5
for letting us address you.
I'd also like to thank Mr. - Kelley 6
for his conti$1ued efforts to push for a full and formal 7
hearing.
8 The question today is: Do you allow for the storage 9
of nuclear fuel rods in casks designed ~for temporary storage 10 and take the chance that they don't become permanent?
11 This should not be an adversarial process today.
12 What it should be, it should be everybody voicing opinions, 13 and a full examination of the facts so that we eliminate all i
14 chances of mistakes.
It would also show good faith on part 15 of the NRC and also on the part of consumers towards the 16 public.
i 17 of the many questions to be answered here, most 18 important are:
Question one, why is there no monitoring 19 system, no way to tell if there are temperatures inside'the 20 cask are approaching accident levels, no monitors to tell-if 21 the helium has leaked,' and also no way to tell if the rods on 22 the inside are still intact?
23 Question
- two, why use helium for storage?
24 considering the fact that the only. nuclear power facility.to 25 ever use helium to cool its reactor was at Fort St. Vrain, s
'l ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950 i
73 1
Colorado plant, which was licensed for 40 years, but was open 2
only T5r a period of ten years.
During that time it was 3
calculated it was in operation only 15 percent of the time all because,'as utility spokesman Mark Stutz put it, our nuclear 4
5 plant didn't work.
6 Question three, af ter sealing the metal basket that.
7 houses the rods by welding it shut, how safe is it going to y
8 be to open it back up with no way to tell. if the rods are 9
still intact?
10 Question four, what about the concerns by the 11 original designers that led them to divest of their interest 12 in the cask design itself?
13 And question five and last, the cask is designed for 14 storage only, but Consumers Power's officials suggested in an 15 article in the New York Times, December 8th, 1992, that they-16 may use them later on for transportation.
17 With these concerns and many others we feel that 18 there should be a
hearing that would allow for-the 19 investigation into the design of the cask, and to make sure 20 beyond any doubt that it would be possible to reopen the cask, 21 and remove the rods for transportation to a permanent site.
22 If Consumers.is happy with the design they should.
f 23 welcome chance to prove its merits to us.
Why must we be-in.
24 such a hurry to complete a process that could ultimately yield 25' such disastrous results.
Some day we will be _ judged for what ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court-Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
...- a.-
e--
+.--w...
-r
-1
- w
-e&
fp w,
,,g.
g a
74 I
we decide here.
Future generations will'look back and see~
~
2 either we were responsible with our duties and prudent, or 3
that we were hasty and irresponsible with our task, that we 4
were too quick to decide their future.
5 For the sake of this planet and many generations to 6
follow us, do we hand them our mistakes and misguided examples.
7 for the sake of deadlines and profit margins, or do we hand 8
them our successes, our knowledge and our good sense.
To tak s 9
a chance on creating another Bopal, India, another Chernobyl, 10 or do we do something else.
11 We will not be judged as individuals, not as a power 12 company, not as a regulatory commission, not as parents, not 13 as activists, not as concerned citizens, but as one society, 14 a community who either stood by and let this happen, or a is community that stood up and said, we wi]1 not let this happen.
16 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
From Farmington Hills, a 17 member of the State Energy Coalition of Michigan, Ms. Mary 18
.Johnston.
Safe Energy.
19 MS. JOHNSTON:
It is the Safe Energy Coalition of^
20 Michigan.
21 First of all I!d like to talk about my three 22 minutes.
It took me two hours to get here, half an hour to 23 park.
I've been working on this issue for 17 years and I-get 24 three minutes.
I really resent it, and I think everybody-.in 25 this room ought to get a long a time as they'need to clear ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
_ Court Reporters 1612-K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006
-(202) 293-3950 a
+
.. - ~.
75 1
this issue up.
2 First of all I have some very simple things that I 3
want to tell you.
~
4 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
May I remind you that you have five days from today to submit in writing as much'as you 5
6 want, and the Commission will be open for the next five' days 7
to receive all of your comments.
I B
MS. JOHNSTON:
I have written comments.
I have 9
particularly not written comments for this, because I am 10 addressing the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which I know is 11 not the body to be addressing for this issue.
That the 12 Nuclear Regulatory Commission itself should be investigated.
13 That there should be a Grand Jury investigation of the Nuclear.
i 14 Regulatory Commission for what they have failed to do for us l
15 as citizens.
They do not regulate the nuclear industry.
They
{
16 support it, they have never found-a nuclear plant they didn't 17 love.
They have never had a site they-wouldn't use.
There 18 has never been anything about nuclear power they do not. love.
19 I refuse to come before this tribunal and speak to 20 people who have co-opted themselves so sufficiently.
I have 21 talked to Mr.
Jan Strathma of the Nuclear Regulatory 22 Commission at Region III until I am -- frankly, I.'m familiar 23 with Jan Strathma.
Really,.he's not a bad guy.
24 But,.to come to this Nuclear Regulatory Commission-25 is a waste of time.
To talk about the ' casks is a waste -of:
I ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202).293-3950
I 1
76 i
1 time.
We must.get rid of the nuclear power plant itself.
I asTing you three things.
Investigate the Nuclear 2
am 3
Regulatory Commission.
I refuse, as a citizen, to come before I
4 this Commission ever to ask them anything.
I am asking you j
5 to prohibit the transportation out of Michigan of any nuclear-
.i 6
waste created in Michigan.
I am proud.to be an anti-nuclear 7
activist.
I am proud to be an environmentalist, I am proud 8
to be a Spotted Owl person.
I feel too mad that the man from 9
Palisades Park, who lives within the shadow of a nuclear power 10 plant, is not an environmentalist.and is not an anti-nuclear-11 activist.
It plainly defies logic, censidering what has 12 happened at Chernobyl.
13 I am asking -- I am telling you that monitored 14 retrievable storage reveals that there is a total lack of a 15 solution to this problem.
-Monitored retrievable storage is 16 invisible -- is what we can visibly see of. the failure of this 17 industry to provide anything.
18 I am asking you last but not least, to close the 19 Palisades Nuclear Power Plant because it is a danger to the 20 area where it is, it is a danger to-the Great Lakes, it.is a-t 21 danger to the people who live near there, it is an economic 22 debacle for which we will pay, and-our children and.our 23 children's children.
And I refuse to be a part of it, and-I 24 will not come here to plead w'ith you to do what must be done.
25 I am asking you, Attorney General,Kelley, to do what--
l 5
1 f
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
?
- 1 77 1
must be done.
~-
2 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
Thank you..Next speaker, l
3 Mr. Clarence Kroupa of Traverse City,. speaking on behalf of
~
4 himself for three minutes.
5 MR. KROUPA:
Yes.
I would like to make a request 6
to State Attorney General Frank Kelley,.that he use his good 7
offices to facilitate a public hearing on the subject at hand, 8
or to request such a hearing be carried out by the appropriate 9
agency.
10 I feel, because of the location and the seriousness 11 of the subject, the governors of the Great Lakes states and 12 provinces should be directly notified of the hearing as well 13 as the population of the Great Lakes area.
14 I
feel at least two basic scenarios must be 15 explored.
A permanent storage in this location and a 16 temporary storage in this location.
17 I didn' t state my name; that's Clarence Kroupa, from 18 Traverse City, Michigan.
19 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
Thank you.
20 Speaking for the Grand Rapids Chapter of Don't Waste i
21 Michigan, Ms. Corinne Carey, three minutes.
Is she here?.
.22 MS. CAREY:
Now, you all know that this doesn't do 23 it, so I won't use it.
In fact it's miserable to try to live 24 that way, isn't it? We' re asking that of' our society, to ' live 25 with the contaminations that are being created that we didn't I
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
R Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
1 78 1
vote for, it's an involuntary risk to ourselves and our plant.
2 This gadget, probably you know more about than I do.
3 It's a RAD alert.
It does give the number of ionizing events
~
4 per minute.
If we're lucky -- lucky,. gambling, it will be 5
somewhere around 14 in this place and this time.
That's 6
considered average.
I've seen a picture. of one used in 7
Chernobyl, it was 176.
I've had this one go up.to 782.when 8
I got it close to a beautiful old watch that somebody wore in 9
their pocket on their person.
10 We've been contaminating this world 'a long time.
N 11 Does that mean we should keep on doing it? -Incidentally, what 12 this shows is not a natural background radiation, it's a 13 normal background radiation, because we don't know what 14 natural is at this point, so we cal 1 it normal.
.It's another 15 weasel-word to try to explain the excuse of going ahead with 16 just a little bit more, insignificant amounts. And one friend' 17 has said, how many insignificants does it take. to make a 18 significant.
19 I went over to the Hope College area last Thursday:
20 and did manage to get some of the pages -- I only bought 45 21 of them at 10 cents each -- and I've got some information;;it 22 includes the information about the annulus, or.at least a j
23 reference to it.
It includes a reference to the RX-277~
I 24 material, which I couldn't figure out from the tabulation and' 25 so on, what that means, but it's part of the transfer cask.
1
'l ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W., Suite 300
.I
~
Washington, D.C.
20006
.i (202) 293-3950
79 1
Okay.
2 But, in general, what I'm impressed with is why most 3
of this, over 1300 pages was not released earlier under the 4
90 day comment period.
It was released.-- and oh, I meant to 5
show you a video tape, but evidently the equipment couldn't 6
get in here, so I'll give each of you this, one of these.
And 7
my other question is too, I'm confused.
Am I talking to 8
industry, am I talking to government?
9 So, we have a few of the pages that are specific 10 about it.
For instance, here is one that is stamped, 11 Proprietary, it says, Fire and Explosion Protection, and then -
12 decommissioning considerations.
Those are just one example 13 of these
- many, many pages that weren't released. until 14 Thursday, January 21st.
Also on Thursday, January 21st was 15 the Federal Register announcement of the - 30 day comment 16 period.
17 Now, I've checked with on.- Grand Rapids ~ library and 18 they usually don't even get the Federal Register from anywhere 19 to five to seven days, so that used up one week of that time.
20 Is that standard procedure, to make a release of over a i
21 thousand pages -- well over, and then start the comment period '
22 the very same day?
It doesn't make sense.
23 So what I am saying is, there must be no loading r
24 before thorough plans are published, and at least a 30 day.
25 public comment information_ period.
There must be a 30 day.
i ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
-=
80 1
extension, at least, of the current public comment period, 2
and I~db hereby request that both transcripts of this meeting 3
today. and public comments received currently, which we cannot lo5k at and consider because they.were just' due 4
even 5
yesterday.
Why was this meeting set when it was?
In fact it 6
came out with an amended thing that first of all was only 7
about an hour long and then was amended to'9;30 to 12'.
l 8
Well, since this is a public meeting,: not a hearing, 9
perhaps there is that room to play with it.
But I do request 10 that the transcripts of this and of the public comments be in 11 all government document rooms.
I shouldn't have to drive to 12 Holland, Michigan, through a snow storm, which is another 13 whole matter, to --
14 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
Sorry, your time is up.
15 MS. CAREY:
And I speak in the name of myself and~
~
16 my grandchildren, Mike, Megan, Brandon,. and Linda and - my 17 great-grandkids, Jorey and the one that's due in April.
18 It says 16.
19 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY: We have a cc.rd, can't make.
20 out the handwriting.
Is there a. Victor McManemry, speaking 21 for himself, for three minutes.
22 MR. MCMANEMRY:
Thank you,' Attorney General, the 23 name is Victor McManemry.
24 I come from Northern Michigan on Grand Traverse Bay. -
25' Grand Traverse Bay just froze up for those of you; who... So, ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES,-LTD.
_ Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300-Washington,.D.C. 20006
'(202) 293-3950.
L 81 1
for the first time in seven years that the Bay has really 2
frozen 7 We were getting nervous.
3 I'm going to speak from the heart today.
I have 4
been moved here today.
We left Traverse City this morning 5
about 5:00.
We nearly avoided an accident on the freeway of 6
people going too fast.
Spun out in front of us out here on 7
96.
People saw it coming and slowed down; averted a disaster.
8 There were cars behind us.
Just a couple of. days ago a 9
hundred cars piled up on I-75, people driving 65 miles an hour 10 on ice covered snowy roads, not heeding warnings, not heeding 11 just common sense.
12 Well, we avoided this little accident'out there.
13 Nothing happened.
We went by, we saw the people with the 14 adrenalin pumping, facing the freeway, coming head on.
15 And, I just implore you gentleman, I feel for-you.
16 The job that you have being appointed as a Commission to deal 17 with this ongoing nightmare that as citizens. and as la participants, as rate payers, as taxpayers, in this dilemma, 19 this quandary, conundrum, whatever you want to call'it; of 20 what we're going to do with this nuclear waste.
21 I was at some hearings up in Big' Rock.
I ' was 22 arrested in Big Rock in 1980.
Those hearings that the-NRC 23 held included a 50 mile d ameter -- 50 mile radius', excuse me, 24 area, for citizens like uslhere to intervene _on_a expansion 25 of that spent fuel pool and - compaction of more fuel rods, ANN RILEY'& ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 a
82 1
again, on the shore of Lake Michigan.
2 With the advent of the Regan-Bush administration, 3
that radius was decreased to five miles, and open testimony, by citizens just from their hearts, coming and speaking to the 4
5 Commissioners, that were moved by the way as much as -I was 6
moved here today, that was eliminated.
So, what's going on 7
here in this last hope of democracy?
8 I don't know where to go from it from here.
I'm a 9
song writer.
I've sailed with Greenpeace for three campaigns 10 in the Great Lakes.
I've looked at these nuclear plants from 11 the water.
You should do it sometime.
You should see them 12 sitting there on the sand dunes.
13 Dale referred to the Odawas that lived'here long 14 before us.
A respected elder who has passed on from 15 Shobytown, Dan Chippeway, at one time during a formation of 16 a Fire Council, said that if these treaties are not adhered 17 to fully these waters will rise again.
And I've.been taken-18 to where the shore was through oral history.
At a time in the 19 oral history of the Odawa people of Northern Michigan that.is 20 now at the base -- if you travel M-22 around' Grand Traverse-t 21 Bay, you're driving.on what used to be water in a time that 22 was before the white people being here.
23 Then I saw the Great Lakes rise at a phenomenal rate 24 when the Army Corps of Engineers was. going to prove that we 25 could have year round shipping in the Great Lakes, and they I
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W., Suite 300-Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950-
83 1
blasted and busted up the ice in the St. Clair River, Detroit 2
Riverr-Brought in even the LaGoseah(ph) a hugh ice breaker 3
from Montreal, the Mackinaw; they did everything they could.
~
4 And they were -- the response of the earth was five blizzards 5
in a row.
They actually built ice and impeded the flow out 6
of the Great Lakes.
The water that spring was at record 7
levels, and that fall there were record rainf alls, and the 8
State of Michigan hauled millions of tons of limestone for 9
Rogers City to save its road system that's on the first ledge 10 of that drop off, and this is in sand dunes --
11 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
All right, you times is 12 up.
13 MR. MCMANEMRY:
Think about it.
Look to your 14 hearts.
Listen to the people.
Neglich (ph).
15 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
The last speaker for 16 three minutes will be Mr. Cameron Kaiser of Hope.
17 Mr. Kaiser.
18 MR. KAISER:
I live right in the southern part in 19 the State of Michigan.
T can throw a stone over in Ohio -f. 3m 20 where I live, and I was one of the guys that would have lost 4
21 my farm if this nuclear thing would have went through back in 22 Michigan.
23 I visited nuclear plants -
'or nuclear storage 24 plants in Kentucky and I've been in high-level waste plants 25 in Ohio.
It took us -- me and two other fellows,-it took us-I ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
-1
84 1
a month before we even got a letter that we would be accepted-2 to view these, just to tell you that if it's'so safe, why it 3
took us so long to be able to get in to one of these, to look 4
them over.
5 And I've also been out in Nevada.
There's people 6
talking about " Nevada.
I've been around Lake Tahoe, and they've got water powered electrical plants out there, ready 7
8 to go to work.
The government out there won't let them put them to work because they've still got nuclear plants working.
9 10 We've had'a lot of water' plants in Michigan ~that 11 they've shut down or took down, and consumers Power's still 12 got some that they're talking of shutting down.
I have a son-13 in-law that works for you people on Consumers, and he's been 14 in the Palisades plant, done worked there.
He's got to no 15 anger to go back, I'll tell 'ya.
If it is so safe, I think 16 that people wouldn't regret working in them, okay.
17 I got another plan for you people to look at.
We've 18 got this water deal on farmers, where they don't want to let 19 us drain m;; water line and our wet lands.
We got the ideal 20 places for more out in more dams and stuff to generate 21 electricity.
Water power is the most powerless power we got 22 in the country.
What I mean that without contaminating.the 23 water.
Why can't we use some of it?
There's no reason,. if 1
24 other states has got them in, we got a government that won't 25 let them put them in to charge them.
There's something wrong i
1 1
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
65 1
here somewhere.
~
s 2
We need some people out here to look ahead, not look 3
behind, and look to fill somebody's elses pockets with big 4
money and poison us.
5 Thank you.
6 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
Thank you'.
7 I want to thank.every citizen who came'here today.
8 All of the citizens of the State. owe you a great. debt of-9 gratitude because you truly are guardians of-the environment 10 in this beautiful Great Lakes state.
11 If there were people who wish their statementa to 12 be amplified or there are others who wish to contact-the.
13 Commission, as I announced earlier, they will have five days 14 from today to address their remarks and comments - ~ to the i
15 Secretary of the Commission at the US Nuclear Regulatory 16 Commission, Washington, DC, 20555, attention Docketing-and 17 Service Branch.
The address is on tables'outside-the room.
18 You don't have to take it down now.
19 I'm also, again, very grateful for the Nuclear 20-Regulatory Commission representatives to be here today.
This 21 was not a hearing for which I wanted and which I continued to_-
22 seek.
You know, if you're going to make an exception of the 23 rule, or make the. procedures easy for an organization you'do-24
=it for an organization,. which perhaps has an excellent-25 reputatior. and has-earned some special consideration, and'I-5 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters
.1612-K Street,-N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006
-(202) 293-3950 w
86 1
don't think that history speaks very well in that regard for 2
the CoTsumer Power Company.
I don't think they deserve any 3
easy solutions.
I think we ~ should go by the book in any
~
dealings we have with that company.
4 S
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER:
Mr. Attorney General, I also 6
asked to speak and was denied the right.
I filled out a card 7
like everyone else and was denied the right.
8 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY:
Well, it's a matter of 9
time and we'll certainly make sure we get your comments.
10 Not only have we had to do battle over environmental 11 matters which are replete in the record with regard to.
12 Consumer Power Company over the years, I don't have to mention 13 to this group, the pumping station, the fish kill problem, 14 that we've had with Consumer Power; all of those matters.
15 What you snvuld be reminded, for example, that we ' re 16 dealing with a company that in the past few years tried, illegally, illegally, to take $2.3 billion out of the company 17 in a scheme found improper and illegal by the courts of our 18 19 State.
And I believe that the NRC, in dealing with a company 20 of Consumers Power's reputation should be careful and go by 21 the book to preserve the integrity of not only the NRC but the 22 protection of the public the truth and integrity.
23 So, rather than give any exceptions here, or make 24 it easier, I think the rule should be heightened and we should 25 have strict scrutiny, and the only way we can do it is to i
(
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
87 1
grant a full a hearing with testimony and I hope the NRC will' 2
consider it and give it to us.
3 Now, having said that' I once again want to thank the NRC for t' heir cooperation within the rules they came here and.
- s 4
5 listened all morning.
I hope that it's been beneficial for 6
them.
know it's been beneficial for me.
U 7
I will ask Mr. Bernero to sum up on behalf of his 8
group before we adjourn the meeting.
9 MR. BERNERO:
Thank you very much.
It wasa very 10 good experience to hear your comments.
When we.go back to Washington we will look for any further comments that you may 11 12 offer and we will consult with the Commission about 'the i
13 substance of these comments which had such a great and 14 pervasive pattern.
There seem to be almost a general 15 unanimity in the comments.
16 And, we thank you for coming out on this day,.which 17 was not a very easy day to come.
The one gentleman starting 18 at 5:00 this morning.
19 Thanks very much.
20 ATTORNEY GENERAL KELLEY: Sorry.
If anybody was cut 21 short it was only because we only had the hall for a certain 22 amount of time, we're running a little overtime now.
Let's 23 hope that this is not ;he end of this matter for any'of us.
24 Thank you very much.
25 (Proceedings concluded, 12:04 p.m.)
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters
'1612 K Street, N.W.,-Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
\\
\\
l REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 1
This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the United States Nuclear Regulatory commission In the Matter of:
l HAME OF PROCEEDING:
W rkshop on Process for Approval of Dry Spent Fuel Storage Casks DOCKET NUMBER:
PLACE OF PROCEEDINGt Lansing, Michigan were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission taken by me and thereafter reduced to typewriting by me or under the I
direction of the court reporting company, and that the transcript is a true and accurate record of the foregoing proceedings.
$)fD btIW 4
Official Reporter Ann Riley & Associates, Ltd.
l I
I' l
l 1
..