ML21257A296
| ML21257A296 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000268 |
| Issue date: | 09/07/2021 |
| From: | Public Commenter Public Commenter |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards |
| NRC/NMSS | |
| References | |
| 86FR43684 | |
| Download: ML21257A296 (6) | |
Text
From: Ken Roper <kenr@co.pickens.sc.us>
Sent: Tuesday, September 7, 2021 4:02 PM To: Rakovan, Lance Cc: Jessica Varney
Subject:
[External_Sender] FW: [EXTERNAL] Duke Relicensing Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Mr. Rakovan, I serve as County Administrator for Pickens County, South Carolina. I am writing to you in that capacity to request your assistance in the current Oconee Nuclear Station (ONS) relicensing. In researching the status of the ONS relicensing I obtained online copies of several of the filings made by Duke Energy.
Duke Energy is and has been a good and valued member of our community, and many of our citizens work at ONS and many more of us benefit from the power produced at this project. We value Duke Energy in Pickens County and want to be supportive of them and their important work.
However, in reviewing the documents online I was concerned to learn that the environmental review in Dukes application was incomplete. Many environmental/historical stakeholders were provided written notice of the ONS application and the potential for impact on historical sites at or near the project boundary. A map was included in the notice which showed ONS and a six mile radius surrounding the site. I assumed, and I believe that the recipients of this letter would also be justified in assuming, that environmental/historical sites within the provided radius on the map were important in the relicensing application.
I contact Duke Energy to inquire about the matter, and also pointed out to them that Pickens County had a dozen or more sites that met the definition of historical significance but we were not included in their notification; neither were they included in the Duke analysis.
After some time, Duke Energy responded that they were only required to provide notice for environmental/historical sites within the current ONS footprint. In my view this position contradicts the written notice sent to stakeholders, referenced above. It certainly contradicts the map attached to these notices.
As you can see below, I reached out to Duke again to see when the public notice would be issued for the environmental scoping discussion as I wanted to attend and voice my concerns. The NRC website indicates this meeting would occur on 9 2021 however I am now informed that the meeting happened earlier, in August, and again without notice to Pickens County.
I want to stress that Pickens County views Duke Energy in the best possible light as a corporate citizen and an important member of our community, but I strongly believe that the analysis of local environmental and/or historical impacts needs to include the area shown on the map attached to the notification letters. I also believe that Pickens County needs to be included as a stakeholder in every relicensing discussion notification for this project.
Can you please provide me guidance on how to best advocate for our important cultural and historical sites in this process? And related, can you please include my comments regarding lack of notice and
inadequacy of review as a part of the additional comments on scope that Mrs DeRoberts with Duke references below?
Thank you, Ken Roper Pickens County SC From: DeRoberts, Emily K <Emily.DeRoberts@duke-energy.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 7, 2021 9:59 AM To: Ken Roper <kenr@co.pickens.sc.us>
Subject:
RE: [EXTERNAL] Duke Relicensing Hey Ken!
Sorry I took so long to respond, I was at the beach for a glorious 2 weeks! Now back to reality.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) held a virtual public environmental scoping meeting on Aug.
25, 2021. I listened in, and was glad to hear Senator Thomas Alexander and a few community leaders providing comments about the benefit of Oconee Nuclear Station and Duke Energy to the community in regard to good jobs, tax base, and community volunteerism/ involvement. Although 2 people from the Sierra Club signed up to speak, they did not call in to the meeting.
Additional comments on the scope of the environmental review can be are due by Sept. 9. Information on the status of subsequent license renewal applications is available on the NRC website - Status of Subsequent License Renewal Applications. There is also a public meeting calendar on the main page of the website, as well as additional information under Public Meetings & Involvement.
- Thanks, Emily Emily DeRoberts District Manager SC Govt and Community Relations Team Duke Energy Carolinas Office 864.260.5378 Cell 864.934.8988 emily.deroberts@duke-energy.com From: Ken Roper <kenr@co.pickens.sc.us>
Sent: Wednesday, September 1, 2021 10:33 AM To: DeRoberts, Emily K <Emily.DeRoberts@duke-energy.com>
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Duke Relicensing
- CAUTION! EXTERNAL SENDER *** STOP. ASSESS. VERIFY!! Were you expecting this email?
Are grammar and spelling correct? Does the content make sense? Can you verify the sender? If suspicious report it, then do not click links, open attachments or enter your ID or password.
- Emily, I notice that the NRC ONS relicensing review schedule includes a Public Meeting - Overview of Subsequent License Renewal Process and Environmental Scoping for 9/2021. Has this meeting been scheduled? I would like to attend.
Thanks!
Federal Register Notice: 86FR43684 Comment Number: 1 Mail Envelope Properties (09e5ed00a70347d1abdd9f1e0c4f0641)
Subject:
[External_Sender] FW: [EXTERNAL] Duke Relicensing Sent Date: 9/7/2021 4:02:02 PM Received Date: 9/7/2021 4:04:32 PM From: Ken Roper Created By: kenr@co.pickens.sc.us Recipients:
"Jessica Varney" <jessicav@co.pickens.sc.us>
Tracking Status: None "Rakovan, Lance" <Lance.Rakovan@nrc.gov>
Tracking Status: None Post Office: co.pickens.sc.us Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 5372 9/7/2021 4:04:32 PM image002.png 13758 image003.png 49227 Options Priority: Normal Return Notification: No Reply Requested: Yes Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date: