ML24219A265
| ML24219A265 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 07/11/2024 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NRC-2934 | |
| Download: ML24219A265 (158) | |
Text
Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Title:
Environmental Scoping Meeting Potential Reauthorization of Power Operations Palisades Nuclear Plant Docket Number:
N/A Location:
teleconference Date:
07-11-24 Work Order No.:
NRC-2934 Pages 1-157 NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC.
Court Reporters and Transcribers 1716 14th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20009 (202) 234-4433
1 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
+ + + + +
ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING MEETING POTENTIAL REAUTHORIZATION OF POWER OPERATIONS PALISADES NUCLEAR PLANT
+ + + + +
- THURSDAY, JULY 11, 2024
+ + + + +
The meeting was convened at 5:59 p.m. EDT, Lance Rakovan, Facilitator, presiding.
2 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com PRESENT:
LANCE RAKOVAN, Facilitator MARLAYNA DOELL, Digital Facilitator LAURA WILLINGHAM, Environmental Project Manager, NRC MARY RICHMOND, Environmental Project Manager, NRC ALICIA WILLIAMSON, Environmental Protection Specialist, DOE TODD STRIBLEY, Director of Environmental Compliance, DOE Loan Programs Office DANIEL BARNHURST MICHAEL SPENCER, General Counsel SCOTT BURNELL, NRC Office of Public Affairs JUSTIN POOLE DON PALMROSE
3 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com ALSO PRESENT:
KEVIN KAMPS, Beyond Nuclear JACQUELINE HOLST JIM NICHOLS REBECCA LOWY, Environmental Law and Policy Center MICHAEL MCLEAN BRUCE DAVIS KATHRYN BARNES, Don't Waste Michigan MICHAEL KEEGAN, Don't Waste Michigan PAUL DONOVIN JACQUELYN DRECHSLER NAYYIRAH SHARIFF JAN BOUDART BETTY PEERMAN INEKE WAY DAVID KRAFT BEN MCLEOD, Office of Representative Bill Huizenga JOEY ANDREWS, Michigan State Representative JOSH PROGACKI, Office of State Senator Aric Nesbitt JAKE RUSHLOW, Office of State Representative Pauline Wendzel DARBY FETZER
4 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com ALSO PRESENT (CONTINUED):
JODI FLYNN BRUCE FETZER ALAN BLIND CONNIE KLINE MIKE CHAPPELL CINDY CORDELL SEAN CONNORS TOM FLYNN KRAIG SCHULTZ, Michigan Safe Energy Future STEPHANIE BILENKO ED RIVET, Michigan Conservative Energy Forum WALLY TAYLOR, Don't Waste Michigan ZACH MORRIS, Market One GEORGE SLEEPER, South Haven City Council DAYWI COOK, Covert Township Supervisor KATE HOSIER, City Manager, City of South Haven JONATHAN CURRENT, IBEW ROSS STEIN, Supervisor, South Haven Charter Township JOHN BRENNAMAN PHILIP HOLT, Generation Atomic TANYA CABALA BRUCE CAMPBELL
5 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com CONTENTS Call to Order and Opening Remarks..................6 Environmental Presentation.........................9 Laura Willingham, NRC....................9, 19 Alicia Williamson, DOE......................15 Public Questions on Process.......................21 Public Comments...................................59 Closing Remarks..................................157
6 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S (5:59 p.m.)
MR. RAKOVAN: Hi. Good evening, everyone, tonight.
On behalf of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or NRC, as you'll hear it referred to tonight, I'd like to welcome everyone and thank you for participating in this evening's environmental scoping meeting for the Palisades Restart Project.
My name is Lance Rakovan, and it's my pleasure to serve as your in-person facilitator this evening. I will be assisted by my associate Marlayna, who is going to be handling the virtual aspect of our meeting tonight.
The agenda, after an initial presentation by the NRC and the Department of Energy, or DOE, we'll go ahead and go into the comment-gathering phase of the meeting, during which we'll hear from you, the members of the public.
To capture your verbal comments, the meeting tonight is being recorded and transcribed. We ask that you help us get a full, clear accounting of the meeting by keeping side conversations to a minimal or stepping out into the hall if you need to have a conversation; silencing your electronic devices or
7 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com turning them off, so they do not disrupt the meeting, and generally, helping us make sure that everyone can hear by using a microphone when it is your time at the mic.
All of the meeting attendees will have their microphones muted and cameras initially disabled if they're participating virtually. Once we get to that portion of the meeting, then I'll go ahead and go into details on how the folks that are participating virtually can raise their hand and provide a comment.
For those of you here, we did ask that you sign up to speak and I do have those sign-in sheets.
And again, I'll be going kind of through all that once we get to that portion of the meeting.
Some basic ground rules. You know, just please be civil. When someone has the microphone, let's give them a chance to speak, again without being disruptive. You know, "Golden Rule," treat others as you'd like to be treated.
Also, if you have anything that you would like to submit for the transcript for today's meeting or for the NRC staff, please go ahead and flag me down and give it to me. We will make sure that any written materials are included.
For those of you who are in the room
8 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com today, emergency exits, but, obviously, back in the way that you came in is one way, and also, to my right over here is another.
If you're looking for a restroom, you can leave the room, make a right, go down the hallway.
The men's room is to the left; the women's room is to the right.
I would now like to go ahead and introduce our speakers tonight.
From the NRC staff, we have Laura Willingham. She's an Environmental Project Manager with the NRC Environmental Center of Expertise, as is Mary Richmond.
From the Department of Energy, we have Alicia Williamson, an Environmental Protection Specialist in the Environmental Compliance, Loan Programs
- Office, and Todd
- Stribley, Director, Environmental Compliance of the Loan Programs Office.
We also have Daniel Barnhurst, who is a Branch Chief with the NRC Environmental Center of Expertise.
So, with that, I'm going to go ahead and turn things over to Laura. We have a short presentation that we would like to give, just to make sure that everyone has a basic understanding of why
9 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com we're here and the processes.
And I will be back to transition to questions and comments once the presentation is over.
So, Laura, please.
MS. WILLINGHAM: Good evening. My name is Laura Willingham. I'm an Environmental Project Manager with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or NRC.
Presenting with me this evening, I have Mary Richmond, also with the NRC. I also have Mr. Dan Barnhurst, who will be helping to answer questions.
On this side, we have Alicia Williamson, who is with the Department of Energy, and Todd Stribley, who will also be helping to answer questions.
Tonight, we would like to discuss the following topics. We would like to present:
An overview of the NRC and DOE and their missions.
An overview of the Palisades potential restart project.
Describe the Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA, as you'll hear it referred to, that process, and how both agencies have responsibilities under that Act.
10 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com We would like to describe the environmental review process that will be done for the Palisades restart effort.
We would also like to provide information on how you can provide scoping comments, once this meeting concludes.
And as Lance mentioned, we'll have a brief Q&A session right after this presentation.
Next slide, please.
Okay. First, I'd like to tell you a little bit about the NRC.
The NRC is an independent federal agency with nearly 50 years of experience regulating the civilian use of nuclear materials. The NRC oversees nuclear reactors, material facilities, medical isotope productions, just to name a few of the activities that we regulate.
The Commission is comprised of up to five members that are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, and they oversee the work of the staff.
The NRC's mission it to protect public health and safety; promote common defense and security; and protect the environment.
Next slide, please.
11 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com We are here tonight to discuss the environmental review for the potential restart of the Palisades Nuclear Power Plant.
Palisades ceased operations on May 20th, 2022, after more than 40 years of operating.
On June 13th, 2022, Palisades certified that they had ended operations and had removed fuel from the reactor vessel.
In 2023, the owner, Holtec Decommissioning International, expressed interest in returning the plant to full power operations.
Holtec Decommissioning International has submitted a series of regulatory and licensing actions or requests over the past several months that will seek NRC's approval to restart the plant.
These requests are, specifically, an exemption request from our regulations; a license transfer request, and several license amendments
[requests]. The set of requests collectively are NRC's proposed action, which I will discuss over the next few slides.
Next slide, please.
The National Environmental Policy Act --
or I will probably refer to it as NEPA from here on --
requires federal agencies, including the NRC, to
12 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com consider the environmental impacts and social and economic impacts of the proposed actions.
Major federal actions that could significantly affect the human environment will require an environmental review. That environmental review will disclose the impacts to the public and to local, state, federal, and tribal stakeholders.
NEPA is often referred to as an umbrella regulation because many other laws require analysis to be included in that NEPA review. For example, when we analyze the impacts of a request of a licensing action, the NRC will also look at impacts from historical and cultural resources, which is required under the National Historic Preservation Act. Also as part of that Act, we will be required to consult with tribes and other historical consulting parties.
The NEPA process allows for and encourages public involvement. Many of those opportunities are through public meetings like today and public comment periods.
Next slide, please.
NRC's regulations that implement NEPA require what's called an Environmental Impact Statement for certain activities or licensing requests that come to the NRC.
13 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com For the potential restart of Palisades, the Applicant, again, as I mentioned, has submitted regulatory requests that would change their current license such that they could reload fuel and restart operations.
I want to emphasize that, in addition to the environmental review, there are safety aspects to our review and that Palisades restart may not be approved without also considering those safety criteria and inspections.
The NRC can also not grant permission for the restart without having completed our NEPA review and also ensuring that required consultations and certain required environmental permits are issued.
The regulatory request for starting Palisades is not an actual action that is requiring an EIS, per our regulations.
Using the process shown on this slide, the staff determined that the licensing request did not meet the criteria for a category exclusion and did not require an Environmental Impact Statement, per our regulations.
Since the impacts of the Palisades restart activities and their significance are not known at this time, we have decided to do what's called an
14 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com environmental assessment.
The NRC will also use studies, reports, and other NEPA documents, including the license renewal Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement in developing this EA. That is a standard NEPA practice that you can use other sources of information that's been previously used, as long as it is still valid.
Next slide, please.
This slide shows the typical resource areas analyzed in an NRC nuclear review. As you can see, we have several that we look at. There's actually over about 15 resource areas. They include things such as land use, air quality, water quality and use, just to name a few.
As part of our analysis, for each resource area, we will describe the environmental baseline, which is, basically, what is the resource like today.
We will also describe the project need, which in this case would be producing power; describe the impacts from the proposed action to the resources. We will also consider cumulative impacts, which are past, present, and reasonably foreseeable impacts to a resource. And we will also consider alternatives.
Next slide, please.
NEPA has always emphasized coordination,
15 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com consultation, and cooperation among federal agencies to allow for efficient federal permitting. A cooperating agency means any federal agency, other than the lead agency, that has jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to any environmental impact or any alternative. A state or local agency can also be a cooperating agency if they have the similar qualifications I just described. And when the effects are on lands of tribal interest, a Native American tribe may also be a cooperating agency.
The lead agency will also be identified, and that agency leads the NEPA review and coordinates with any cooperating agencies in the development of the NEPA document. For the NEPA review associated with the potential Palisades restart, the NRC is the lead federal agency and DOE is a cooperating agency.
We are doing this, so that we have one NEPA document that can be used for both decisions by both agencies.
Both agencies have their own jurisdiction and their own lanes and are separate but will use one document to make the same NEPA decision.
With that, I'm going to turn it to Alicia who's going to describe DOE's participation in the review.
MS. WILLIAMSON: Good evening. My name is
16 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com Alicia Williamson and I'm the NEPA Document Manager at the U.S. Department of Energy's Loan Programs Office, or LPO, working on the Palisades potential restart project.
As Laura has mentioned, I will now briefly provide some background information on the DOE's Loan Programs Office mission, its financing programs, and its role in the Palisades Nuclear Plant potential restart project environmental review.
The U.S. Department of Energy's Loan Programs Office works with the private sector to finance the deployment and scale-up of innovative, clean energy technologies, build energy infrastructure and domestic supply chains, create jobs, and reduce emissions in communities across the United States.
Specifically, LPO provides funding to large-scale energy infrastructure projects that will achieve America's energy objectives. There are four programs, four solicitations, the LPO administers.
The first being the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Program, or ATVM, provides financing for manufacturing of advanced technology vehicles, components, and innovative EV charging infrastructure.
The next is the Tribal Energy Loan
17 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com Guarantee Program, which provides financing for tribal energy development projects.
- Then, there's the Carbon Dioxide Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act, or CIFIA, which provides financing for large-capacity common carrier CO2 transportation projects.
And finally, the Title 17, Clean Energy Financing Program, also known as Title 17, which I will go into more details about on the next slide.
Next slide, please.
Under the Title 17 Clean Energy Financing Program, LPO supports deployment of commercial-scale clean energy products which can be innovative, as well as energy infrastructure reinvestment projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution.
There are four categories to the Title 17 solicitation.
The Palisades potential restart project qualifies for Section 1706, the Energy Infrastructure Reinvestment Financing Program, because it's a commercial-scale project that is retooling and/or repowering energy infrastructure in the United States, which has ceased operations and will, ultimately, avoid, reduce, and utilize air pollutants -- reduce and utilize air pollutants and greenhouse gases.
18 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com Next slide, please.
Reiterating what was stated earlier, the DOE LPO is a cooperating agency on the environmental assessment being prepared by the NRC for the potential restart of the Palisades Plant, and the NRC is the lead agency for this part of the environmental review.
The DOE's proposed action for the project is to decide whether or not to provide federal financial support or a loan guarantee to support repowering operations at the nuclear power plant.
The purpose and need for DOE's proposed action is to implement DOE's authority under Title 17 of the Energy Policy Act, specifically, the Energy Infrastructure Reinvestment Program, or Section 1706 of the Act.
LPO will use the information and analysis in the EA to inform its decision whether to provide federal financial support for additional activities needed to repower the facility, specifically, related to fuel transfer, fuel loading, and leading to full power operations.
And finally, we would like to note that all the comments received during the NRC's scoping process or NRC's comment periods for the EA will be considered as part of the LPO NEPA decisionmaking
19 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com process.
That concludes my section of tonight's presentation. I'll now turn it back to Laura and Mary.
MS. WILLINGHAM [RICHMOND]: Thank you, Alicia.
Tonight, I'll be reviewing the NRC's scoping process for the Potential Palisades Restart Project. As Laura mentioned, the NRC has determined that it will be doing an EA if the analysis supports, also, a finding of no significant impact, or FONSI.
For more complex environmental reviews, a scoping process is typically conducted to ensure public input to the greatest extent possible, and that's why we're here tonight, is to receive that public input on scoping to make sure we know all the significant issues that the community wants us to provide in the analysis and EA.
So, the scoping process includes -- it's part of a larger information-gathering process that NRC uses to prepare the draft NEPA document, in this case an EA. The staff is going to be considering every relevant scoping input comment. We'll be reviewing each and every comment that we receive during the scoping period. We'll bin those comments,
20 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com and they'll be a part of the NEPA document itself with the appropriate response.
The information-gathering process the NRC uses, that's just a portion of it. We also rely heavily on input and coordination and feedback from you, the public; from external stakeholders, such as other federal, state, and local agencies and tribal nations, as Laura mentioned before. The process also includes regulatory activities, such as audits and requests for additional information from applicants.
As Laura has mentioned, public input will also be sought on the draft environmental assessment.
Next slide, please.
We want to hear from as many stakeholders as possible in the process. This slide presents the multiple ways in which the public can submit their comments. In addition to oral comments that will be taken tonight, a recording will be taking all the comments and including to them.
In addition to oral comments, you can submit your comments electronically to the email address shown on the slide, to the regulations.gov website, also on this slide -- just make sure you use the Docket ID Number -- or in a letter to the address that's also indicated.
21 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com You will also find a very useful "Be Heard" card when you came in today. On that card, it contains all those multiple ways that you can submit your comments to us. Also, you'll find a handy QR code that will allow you to comment directly. It will take you directly to that site for comment.
Also, we've got on the slide, so that you can keep informed, "Be Informed," as we call it.
We've set up a site where anybody that wants to apply to the site will receive all the information that goes back and forth, as we move forward in the process.
The Draft EA and other publicly available documents, you will get those directly by applying to the "Be Informed" site. Those cards are also at the tables, if you want to take that.
Next slide, please.
And on this slide, there is just the contact information for the NRC staff and DOE staff.
Hand it back to Lance.
MR. RAKOVAN: Thank you.
So, we're upgrading our tech.
Okay. As we noticed in the agenda for the public meeting that we posted, we would like to offer a short opportunity for folks in attendance, whether you're here in the room or if you're participating
22 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com virtually, to ask clarifying question on our presentation tonight.
Now again, our primary purpose here is to listen to you. So, we'd like to get to that part of the meeting as quickly as possible, but we do want to make sure that folks understand the presentation that we have given.
So, if you are here in the room and you have any clarifying questions about our presentation tonight, again, specific to the presentation, if you want to raise your hand, I can run you a microphone.
And for those of you who are participating virtually, you can use the "Raise My Hand" feature on Teams.
Or, if you're on the phone, you can hit
- 5. Once we acknowledge your hand, for those of you on the phone, then, you can hit *6 for unmute once we've activated your microphone.
So, I do have one question here in the room that I'll go ahead and go to, and then, I'll check in with Marlayna online. Oh, I've got two.
Okay.
MR. KAMPS: Thank you.
Yes, my name is Kevin Kamps with Beyond Nuclear.
23 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com And my question is to the Department of Energy officials. So, my question is, the Loan Programs Office, both loans and loan guarantees, is there a safety criteria associated with the issuance of these loans and loan guarantees.
And a related question, I'm assuming that NRC is your safety expertise that you're relying on to make that determination. So, my second followup question is, what if the safety regulator is not doing their job?
MR. STRIBLEY: Thank you for that question.
And, yes, you are correct. As we review the loan application that's before us and go through our due diligence of reviewing the potential loan guarantee that we would provide, we do look at their compliance with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, their regulations, their licensing authority. So, that is the key factor that we would consider as part of reviewing the overall loan application package there.
To the second question about what would we do if the -- I really can't speak to that. I'm not sure, Laura, if you wanted to add anything more about NRC not doing their job. It's I don't believe that
24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com they don't. But, Laura, if there's anything more to add to that -- I don't really -- yes?
MS. WILLINGHAM: Yes, so I think I'll just clarify that, you know, DOE's cooperation is strictly under the environmental review. So, we are not sharing any information related beyond what is publicly available for the safety review. So, while they do have that criteria, they are using publicly available information to make that determination. And that would be all I would clarify from that.
MR. RAKOVAN: If you could please let us know your name and if you have any affiliation?
MS. HOLST: My name is Jacqueline Holst, and I am here representing the public today.
My question is, on Title 17, clean energy financing, I'm just curious, who made nuclear energy clean energy? Because there is waste associated.
And then, as a followup to that, it says, "energy infrastructure reinvestment." It does still pollute and produce emissions. So, I'm just curious who made nuclear energy clean energy.
MR. STRIBLEY: It was part of the Energy Policy Act, as amended. So, it was Congress which identified the categories that fall under that energy infrastructure reinvestment in terms of the clean
25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com energy.
And in terms of the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, yes, we do acknowledge that, but there is a life cycle analysis that goes on with each project to make sure that, yes, it does reduce greenhouse gases when compared to other sources or other generation assets in the grid mix.
MR. RAKOVAN: Let me do a check-in with Marlayna. Marlayna, do we have anyone online that has any clarifying questions at this time?
MS. DOELL: Yes. Good evening, Lance. It looks like we have three folks that have clarifying questions. The first one is Jim Nichols.
Jim, I'm going to go ahead and just enable your microphone. So, you should be able to come off of mute and ask your question.
MR. NICHOLS: Okay. This is actually just a quick technical question.
I'm here on my phone, iPhone, and I'm not seeing the slides. I'm wondering if that's just a limitation of Teams if you're on the phone.
MS. DOELL: That may be the case.
MR. RAKOVAN: Yes.
MS. DOELL: Yes, usually, you can see the slides. If not, I know the slides are attached to the
26 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com public meeting announcement for this
- meeting, available through the NRC's public website. I can find the Accession Number for those, if you need them, but that might be the easier way to see them, if Teams is giving you an issue today.
MR. NICHOLS: Thank you.
MS. DOELL: All right, folks.
MR. RAKOVAN: Oh, I'll go ahead and go to -- oh, sorry, go ahead.
MS. DOELL: Oh, no, go ahead, Lance, if you have someone else in the room.
MR. RAKOVAN: No, go ahead, Marlayna. I'm going to look up -- I have the ML number on me, but go ahead and go to the next question.
MS. DOELL: Okay, perfect.
Then, in the meantime, we have Rebecca Lowy.
I'm going to go ahead and make you a presenter. So, you should have the ability to unmute your microphone and ask a question.
MR. LOWY: Hi. My name is Rebecca Lowy with the Environmental Law & Policy Center.
My first question actually was if the slides were going to be available. So, it sounds like they are, which is great.
27 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com The second is that, in the Notice of Intent to conduct a scoping document, there is the invitation to submit public comments, and then, there's also a subsection where it states that the NRC "invites the following entities to participate in scoping." And towards the end of that, it further states, "Any person who requests or who is requesting an opportunity to participate, and any person who has petitioned their intent to petition."
So, I'm just wondering if someone from NRC can clarify what the difference is between this public comment opportunity and this participation in scoping that seems to be available to anyone who would like to be part of it.
MS. WILLINGHAM: I am happy to attempt to do that, but I also believe that Michael Spencer is on virtually, who is with our General Counsel. So, he can supplement my response.
So, the environmental scoping is a process that's under the National Environmental Policy Act, and that is to help us determine the scope of the environmental analysis that we need to complete as part of that regulatory requirement.
Also in our regulations, there are opportunities for a hearing, which is an adjudicatory
28 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com process, and that's for certain types of licensing actions. So, in this case, the license transfer and the license amendments would be -- there would be an FRN issued for an opportunity for hearing for those activities.
And I'll let Michael add on.
MR. RAKOVAN: And just FRN is Federal Register Notice, just in case you weren't familiar with it.
MS. WILLINGHAM: Oh, yes. Sorry. Thank you, Lance.
MR. SPENCER: Hello. This is Michael Spencer from the Office of General Counsel of the NRC.
I would just add that the section you referenced lists different persons who are invited to participate in the scoping. And participating in the scoping is providing comments, which you can do at this meeting or by submitting them by July 29th, as stated during the presentation. So, just a kind of reminder that those people are invited to provide input to the scoping process.
MR. RAKOVAN: And just real quick, I did neglect to provide the information on how to find the slides online. For those of you who are participating virtually, an easy way to do it is just to go to the
29 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com NRC's public meeting schedule and go to the specific page for this meeting. Scroll down and you will see a link.
If you are familiar with our ADAMS system, I'll give you the Accession Number for that, and you can go into ADAMS and find it there as well. The Accession Number is ML24193A025. Again, that's ML24193A025.
Marlayna, you said you had one more person, and then, I think I've got two more hands here. But you had one more person who had raised their hand?
MS. DOELL: We have several more who have joined us. So, I currently have five hands raised online. I can go to the next one, and then, we can return to the folks in the room, if that works for you.
MR. RAKOVAN: Go ahead.
MS. DOELL: All right. Michael McLean, I have you up next in the cue. I'm going to go ahead and enable your microphone. Please feel free to ask your question.
MR. MCLEAN: Hi. My name is Michael McLean. Can you hear me?
MS. DOELL: Yes, I can.
30 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com MR. MCLEAN: Great. Hi.
I'm actually a resident in Illinois. I live just across the pond from you all, but I live very close to Lake Michigan and I care about it a lot.
I want to say that I am in full support of the restart of Palisades. It is amazing to see --
MR. RAKOVAN: Sir, I'm sorry to interrupt you, but we're taking clarifying questions right now.
Do you have a
clarifying question on the presentation?
MR. MCLEAN: Actually, then, yes, I did have a question. I am curious. Yesterday, the ADVANCE Act passed. So, I am curious if that changes this process at all.
MR. RAKOVAN: I will introduce Scott, who is from our Office of Public Affairs.
MR. BURNELL: Good evening, everyone. My name is Scott Burnell. I am one of the spokespeople for the agency at our headquarters.
President Biden did sign the ADVANCE Act a couple of days ago. That Act does have several provisions that affect how the NRC conducts its business. The requirements in those provisions will take some time to put into place. At this point, we do not expect that the provisions will affect the
31 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com current review for the Palisades Restart Project.
MR. RAKOVAN: Thanks, Scott.
All right. I'm going to go ahead and go to the hands that I have here.
Sir, could you introduce yourself, please?
DR. DAVIS: My name is Dr. Bruce Davis. I live in Palisades Park, which i[s] right adjacent to the nuclear power plant.
And when I'm talking about health and safety, I want to know what you guys are going to do to ensure the health and safety of the residents that live next door.
And I say this because we met with Jack --
I think his name is Giessner -- the regional guy about 10 years ago. And I gave him evidence that we were having a real problem in Park with thyroid disease and thyroid cancer. We have over 40 people in our community of 200 homes that have thyroid issues.
Statistically, that is significant, which means that there's something that's been going on.
We have great concern that, with aged infrastructure and trying to reopen this plant at warp speed, that safety issues -- you've got to get it right. You've got to get it right the first time.
I'm disappointed that Jack didn't follow
32 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com up on his word 10 years ago and do a study for us.
We're in the middle of doing our own study right now.
We hired an epidemiologist and we want this on the public record. And I want to know that you guys have our backs, because we're the neighbors.
MR. BARNHURST: Yes, hi. This is Dan Barnhurst. I'm the Manager of the environmental group that does the environmental reviews from the Environmental Center of Expertise at the NRC.
I appreciate your comment and your question. I want you to know the NRC's mission is to be protective of human health and the environment.
As part of this review, there will be two
-- there's a two-part review that occurs as part of our evaluation of these requests. One is a safety review. The other is the environmental review, which is what we're here to discuss tonight.
There are crossover areas between those reviews, and human health is one of those areas. And so, that's something we do take seriously and will be considering.
Just briefly, I'll point over to the poster on the wall there that shows -- and it was on the screen earlier -- that shows the areas that are considered as part of the review and, also, our review
33 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com process.
Step one, aside from scoping and hearing public concerns and comments and things that need to be considered in the review, of which this is a part -
- and I appreciate your comment -- the next step is for us to determine what the baseline environment or the affected environment is for each of those resource areas. And again, human health is one of those. And so, as part of our review, we'll consider that as far as establishing the baseline, and then, we consider impacts on top of that.
I would say, also, that beyond that, there are a number of different resource areas considered in the review that are also important to human health as well.
MR. RAKOVAN: Sir, we're not going to be able to hear you unless you are mic'ed. Are you providing comment at this time or is it another clarifying question?
MR. BARNHURST: Yes, I heard his --
MR. RAKOVAN: Can you repeat the question?
MR. BARNHURST: So, you asked if I could guarantee that that would be addressed. And I would ask that you submit your comment here tonight. This is being transcribed as well. So we've got it, but,
34 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com also, please submit comments, either in this meeting or please submit what you have through the website we have or through regulations.gov. And that's something we'll consider as part of our review.
MR. RAKOVAN: All right. I've got one more clarifying question here in the room, and then, we'll go back to the virtual hands that are raised.
Please, if you could introduce yourself?
MS. BARNES: Yes. My name is Kathryn Barnes. I'm with Don't Waste Michigan.
And years ago, Palisades had leaks underneath the plant that could not be taken care of, the tritium and the radioactive effluents down there under the plant, unless the plant was taken down.
And I urged the NRC, shut it down. You know, clean it up. Don't let it sit there. Well, it sat there all these years, which could be part of the problem that the doctor mentioned with the thyroid cancer. It could be in the groundwater. It could also be in the air.
It's well-known that radioactivity causes thyroid cancer.
My question is, are you going to clean it up? Are you going to take the plant down and clean it up? Or are you just going to let it sit there?
And then, I have a second question, which
35 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com is, what is the difference between an Environmental Impact Statement and an environmental assessment? And are you including the possibility of a meltdown and what that would do to the environment?
MR. BARNHURST: Yes, that was a multi-part question. I'm happy to take the first one.
So, the first question, as I understand it, was about potential leaks at the Palisades plant.
I'll just say again that we're committed to protecting the environment and public health and safety, and that as part of that, the NRC requires monitoring and annual reporting of groundwater quality in the area around the plant.
We learned in our audit earlier this week that there were 39 monitoring wells. This is something that we learned as part of our environmental evaluations. This has, of course, been known by the folks that have been consistently involved on the NRC's side in reviewing those annual monitoring reports. This is part of our baseline study that we'll evaluate, so the annual reports and the results of those reports.
I will say that, as far as the operating plant, I do know that the NRC monitors that, because we take it seriously. Those are monitored in order to
36 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com identify any leaks that may occur and be able to go in and assess where the leaks are coming from and clean that up; also, assess any impacts to human health.
And so, that's for the operating plant.
I'll say, maybe again kind of pivoting to what we're doing now as part of our environmental review, the first step is to understand the baseline of the environment that the proposed action, which is the potential restart, would be impacting. And we would consider, will consider -- excuse me -- the current state of the groundwater quality at the site, and then, as part of our review, we'll draw conclusions and impacts on what we think the impact would be to water if the restart occurred.
MS. RICHMOND: I'll take part two of the question. I think you asked what the difference between an environmental assessment, EA, and an Environmental Impact Statement is.
As Laura went through the slides, she gave a brief description of that, but there's an Environmental Impact Statement which is required through regulation for a list of licensing activities, such as a new license when they're going to build a new power reactor. It's known there's major environmental impacts.
So, we will do an
37 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com Environmental Impact Statement.
And EA is a decisional document. It's really where it's not known if there's going to be a significant impact to the environment. So, we do a complete environmental assessment to make that determination: is there going to be a significant impact to the environment?
If during that assessment we find there is going to be a significant impact to the environment, we will do an Environmental Impact Statement. If we find that there's no[t] a significant impact to the environment, then what we'll do, when we issue the final environmental assessment, we'll also issue what's called a Finding of No Significant Impact, or FONSI.
So, you'll see that's kind of the difference between those two.
MR. RAKOVAN: All right. Marlayna, let's go ahead and take care of those hands virtually.
Again, we're looking for clarifying questions at this time on the presentation. We'll move to providing comments after we've taken care of clarifying questions.
Marlayna, go ahead.
MS. DOELL: All right. Thank you, Lance.
38 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com The next person we have in the queue is a phone-in caller with the last four digits 1441. I'm going to go ahead and enable your microphone.
Sorry about that. I believe, from a phone call, you can press *6 and it should enable your microphone.
Again, Caller 1441.
MR. KEEGAN: Can you hear me?
MS. DOELL: Yes, I can.
MR. KEEGAN: Thank you.
Michael Keegan with Don't Waste Michigan.
A housekeeping question. I joined by phone because I was not able to access with your Teams, your Microsoft Teams, which was unusual for me because I generally attend several NRC meetings. So, is your Microsoft Teams system working? That's one question.
The other question is, when is the transcript going to be available? Can you make that immediately available within a couple of days?
And my third clarifying question is, when will be the deadline for interventions related to safety evaluation issues. On the LARs and the exception, when is the deadline to intervene there? A clarifying question.
39 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com Thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: So, Marlayna, have you heard any other rumblings online about people having issues with Teams? I mean, there's always a potential issue with Teams, but --
MS. DOELL: No. I mean, we have a large number of folks that have been able to join us successfully via Teams.
So, Mr. Keegan, you may want to try the registration link again. I believe I have your email from previous interactions. I can even re-send it to you to see if that would work. Otherwise, we can hear you just fine over the phone. I apologize for the inconvenience.
MR. KEEGAN: Okay. And transcripts, and what is the date to intervene regarding safety analysis?
MS. WILLINGHAM: So, I think that Marlayna is helping to address your Teams issue.
For the transcripts, transcripts take a few days to get from the court reporter, and then, the NRC staff has to review it to ensure typos and those kinds of things are corrected. So, I would say that, typically, takes a week and a half to two weeks max, and then, the transcript would be available.
40 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com With regard to the content -- or I think you're asking about the opportunity for hearing and when that might be available. I will have to defer, again, to -- I think there is, like, Justin Poole and maybe Michael Spencer online who can help with that question.
MR. POOLE: Hi, Laura. This is Justin Poole from the NRC. I'm a Licensing Project Manager for the restart effort.
The clock you're referring to, Mr. Keegan, on the timing for hearing opportunity hasn't started yet because the notices have not been, to start that clock, have not been issued yet. We're working on those and we expect to issue those in the next couple of weeks.
MR. KEEGAN: And will we be notified of that?
MR. POOLE: They will be in The Federal Register, yes.
MR. KEEGAN: Okay. Thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay, Marlayna, do you want to go to our next hand, please?
MS. DOELL: Sure. We still have about five hands raised here.
Again, a reminder that we are just taking
41 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com questions at this point.
But the next person in the queue is Paul Donovin.
Paul, I'm going to go ahead and enable your microphone. You should be able to unmute and ask your question.
All right. In the interest of time, since I'm not hearing from Paul, I think we'll go to the next person. Then, we'll give Paul another shot. I know sometimes it can be hard to find the unmute button after this long.
The next person in the queue is Jacquelyn Drechsler.
Jacquelyn, I'm going to go --
MR. DONOVIN: I found my button.
MS. DOELL: Oh, there you are. Sorry, Paul, go ahead.
MR. DONOVIN: Sorry, I'm used to Zoom and the button is in a different spot.
MS. DOELL: Yes, of course.
MR. DONOVIN: A couple of clarifying questions.
You're supposed to also look at what I understand is alternatives to nuclear. So, people talk about solar. For 900 megawatts, that would take
42 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com about, oh, 1200 or so acres, and in Michigan that's prime farmland. So, in terms of human health, there's people that depend on that farmland to produce food that we eat.
And to me, the Michigan fruits and vegetables are unique in this part of the world. And you probably want to, before you leave to go back to Washington, sample them for your own information.
Item 2 is, are you considering spent fuel reuse. And the Canadians have proposed a variation of the CANDU reactor that uses blended-down spent fuel.
So, would that be considered as an alternative?
And I guess those are my two questions.
MR. RAKOVAN: I'll see if any of the NRC folks want to respond. But, to me, those sounded like comments in terms of topics that you would like us to look into as part of this effort. So, I'll let the NRC respond if they wish to, but those sounded more like comments to me, sir.
MS. RICHMOND: So, well, we got one question out of it. That is what we are considering for alternatives. We do look at energy alternatives and it relies heavily on the purpose and needs statement of the applicant and what the potential alternatives may be.
43 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com So,
- you, specifically, brought up considering the reuse. That is not, typically, an energy alternative that we look at. That's more of a technology alternative that we have not -- that would go through a whole different process of licensing before we get into reuse.
MR. RAKOVAN: All right, Marlayna, can we go to the next hand?
And again, we're looking specifically for clarifying questions about the presentation this evening. We'll be moving to commenting soon.
MS. DOELL: All right. Sure thing.
Next up is Jacqueline Drechsler.
And just for awareness, Nayyirah Shariff, you will be after Jacqueline.
Jacqueline, I'm going to go ahead and enable your microphone. You should be able to unmute yourself.
MS. DRECHSLER: Thank you very much.
So, yes, I do have a question that is a clarifying question. I am concerned about the timeline for comments. If the comments are due by July 29th, I think I heard, that only leaves approximately two weeks for comments on such a huge topic. I'm not an expert, but I'd like to make
44 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com comments. And I will tell you that it's going to take me, and most of the public, more than three weeks to be able to review all of this and be able to write coherent comments.
So, I'm suggesting that maybe there's going to be an extended comment period on this, because I don't think it's fair to the public. It's just something that occurred to me.
Thank you.
MS. WILLINGHAM: So, the NRC staff determined that 30 days would be sufficient for the scope of this request. You're more than welcome to submit an extension request and we would consider that at that time.
MR. BARNHURST: Yes, if I could just add onto what Laura said, this isn't your only opportunity to comment. This is the first opportunity to comment, and the purpose of the comments now are to make sure that we understand the full suite of issues that should be considered in our analysis.
When the draft analysis is ready -- and I think they addressed kind of the schedule for that in the presentation -- but when that draft analysis is ready, there will be another opportunity for folks to review what has been considered, the impacts that have
45 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com been drawn, and comment on that. And we welcome that.
MS. DRECHSLER: All right. Thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: Marlayna, who do we have next?
MS. DOELL: Yes, next up, we have Nayyirah Shariff. I apologize if I'm butchering your name.
And after that will be Jan Boudart.
Nayyirah, you should be able to unmute your microphone and ask your question.
Oh, I see that you have come off mute, but we cannot hear you.
(Pause.)
All right. I think we'll move on to the next person while we try to figure that out for Nayyirah.
In the meantime, next on the list is Jan Boudart.
Jan, I'm going to go ahead and give you the ability to unmute your microphone. Please feel free to ask your question.
And, Nayyirah, we'll come back to you after Jan.
(Pause.)
Oh, maybe not. I'm striking out today.
MS. BOUDART: Oh, great, right now --
46 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com MS. DOELL: Oh, there you are, Jan. Okay.
MS. BOUDART: Maybe it worked. Okay.
MS. DOELL: Go ahead.
MS. BOUDART: I was searching around for the way to do this.
I have a two-part question and the parts are related.
From what I understand, the NRC is not considering the effect of the nuclear power plant on the environment -- or on the environment. Wait, I'm getting that wrong.
Okay. The nuclear power plant will be affected by extreme weather events. And I'm wondering, given the environmental assessment versus the Environmental Impact Statement, if extreme weather events are going to be considered in one or the other, and the effect that the environment is going to have on the nuclear power plant, that's -- my question, basically, is: when do you consider the effect that the environment is having on the nuclear power plant, especially extreme weather events?
MS. WILLINGHAM: So, when a license is granted by the NRC, as part of the safety review, they have an external hazards assessment where they will look at external hazards such as what you were
47 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com describing, extreme weather events such as flooding.
And they will consider that before they will give a license.
So, I think you also had a question about
-- well, I just will clarify that we also look kind of at postulated accidents, which you were kind of asking how that would be considered in an environmental review. So, we do look at postulated accidents and any environmental impacts from those, which could be as a result of multiple things, including external hazards.
MR. RAKOVAN: Hey, Marlayna, I've got a couple of hands here in the room that I want to get to, and then, let's take the hands that you have on at this point and finish up. It's coming up on seven o'clock and I'd really like to move to our commenting portion of the meeting. So, I'm going to go to the two hands that I have here, and we'll go back to you with the hands you have, and then, we'll move on to commenting.
MS. DOELL: Okay, that works.
MR. KAMPS: Thank you.
Kevin Kamps with Beyond Nuclear.
It's a followup on Mr. Keegan's question from Don't Waste Michigan. I don't know if Justin
48 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com Poole or Office of Legal Counsel should answer it.
But the question is, I heard multiple license amendment requests, as well as a license transfer. So, I'm wondering, will there be a single Federal Register notice and a single deadline for interventions? Or are there going to be a series of Federal Register notices and a series of deadlines?
And I'm curious what those deadlines are in terms of number of days post-publication in the FRN.
MR. POOLE: This is Justin Poole. I'll take that one, and if I misspeak, I'll let Michael Spencer correct me.
But there, the plan is to issue two different notices in The Federal Register. One will be for the license transfer, and then, one will be for the suite of license amendments that were submitted.
And that's because the timing of, in our regulations, the timing and some of the requirements for a license transfer hearing request is a little bit different than for a license amendment request.
And again, I'm going to throw out some numbers here, but, Michael, you can correct me. But my understanding is the timing to request a hearing for a license transfer is 20 days and the timing for the license amendments, again, for requesting a
49 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com hearing, is 60 days from the date it shows up in The Federal Register, which, as I said before, it hasn't shown up yet.
MR. RAKOVAN: I've got one last hand here, and then, we'll go through the hands that we have online, and then, move towards commenting.
Please, if you would?
MS. PEERMAN: My name is Bette Peerman.
And in regards to the scoping of the environment issues, I'm not real clear whether this is just scoping having to do with the restart of a shuttered plant or if it also is going to be scoping to consider what the impact is going to be if they build two small reactors on the same property. And that wasn't clear in your presentation today whether all of that is included in this scoping or if that's going to be something down the road.
MS. WILLINGHAM: So, the scoping for this project is focused on the restart activities. But, as I mentioned before, there's a cumulative impact assessment which looks at
- past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions or projects that could impact a resource. So, while this scoping is focused, and the EA is focused, on the restart efforts, we do have a section that will be looking at what is past,
50 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com present, and reasonably foreseeable.
Reasonably foreseeable is any project that has made some type of an announcement that they are going to do building or, you know, whatever the action is or the project is. So, the SMRs would be something that would be considered in that section.
So, I hope that answers your question, yes.
MR. RAKOVAN: All right, Marlayna, let's go ahead and take those last three hands, and then, we could move on to commenting, please.
MS. DOELL: Okay. Perfect.
Nayyirah Shariff, you should still have the ability to unmute yourself. I'll give you another chance, see if we can get the technical difficulties figured out.
MS. SHARIFF: Okay. Can you guys hear me now?
MS. DOELL: Yes, I can.
MS. SHARIFF: Or no?
MS. DOELL: Yes.
MS. SHARIFF: Okay. Perfect.
I have, like, a couple of questions, and then, like a comment.
The comment, I'm getting that out of the
51 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com way. I am very much hoping that the cumulative impact assessment is going to include something on public health. And my two questions are kind of related to public health.
Just curious as to why, you know, the CDC or the NIH is not, like, one of these consulting agencies. I don't know if that is something that NRC normally does, but highly encourage that.
And then, I guess my other question is, I really wanted to, like, if possible, dig in a little bit deeper on why there was a choice to do the environmental assessment instead the Environmental Impact Statement. Like I don't think I've really landed in my head on why there was a different choice made.
Thank you.
MS. WILLINGHAM: The first question was a little bit difficult to hear, but I think you were asking about consulting. I apologize if that was not it, and you can correct me if I'm wrong. Maybe I'll pause here.
(Pause.)
Okay. So, we do --
MS. DOELL: I believe she was asking, specifically, about whether the CDC is one of the
52 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com agencies that will be consulting on the environmental assessment.
MS. WILLINGHAM: Oh, we do consider reports and studies from CDC and other sources. So, that is a way that, you know, we do interact with the CDC. They are a resource, though. You know, their studies and their reports are resource that we do look at. We do not, typically, send, like -- we just coordinate with them by using their research as part of our analysis.
And then, the EA and EIS, versus EIS, Mary will take that one. She tried to explain it earlier.
So, I'll let her --
MS. RICHMOND: Yes, I will try to go deeper into that one.
So, our regulations stipulate certain actions where an EIS -- we know there's going to be a major impact to the environment -- is required. And there's also another category, categorical exclusions, where, basically, we have determined through history or something, or maybe an administrative action, there's not going to be an impact to the environment, or a very little one. And that's what a categorical exclusion is.
With an EA, that's a decisional document.
53 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com Is there going to be a significant impact or a not significant impact? If during that assessment we determine that there's a significant impact, we will go to an Environmental Impact Statement.
So, for this particular project, because it's a first of its kind, we want to be able to do that assessment to determine if there's going to be a significant impact to the environment or not before proceeding.
And it's unique. The baseline for this project is very unique from some of the other projects that require an Environmental Impact Statement. Many of them are greenfield sites where there hasn't been any disturbance and there's going to be a lot of disturbance, acres and acres, to a site.
In this case, what we're really doing is coming to an understanding of what the reauthorization activities are and what the disturbance and the environmental interfaces are, and that's when we'll determine if there's going to be a significant impact to the environment. And if there is, then we will go the route of an Environmental Impact Statement.
MS. DOELL: Thank you.
I think, per our original plan, we're going to take the next two folks to ask questions, and
54 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com then, we'll transition into the comment phase of the meeting.
Anyone that's currently already in the queue online will retain their place. So, please don't worry about that.
Next is going to be Ineke Way. And I, again, apologize if I am not pronouncing your name correctly.
You should have the ability to unmute your microphone and ask your question. And please remember, as everyone is coming in, to introduce yourself and share any affiliations you may wish to share for the purposes of the transcript.
Go ahead.
MS. WAY: Thank you.
My name is Ineke Way. I'm in Kalamazoo, 35 short miles from Palisades. I have three brief questions.
The first question: what is your understanding of why the Palisades plant was closed in 2021? And how is this information being used to recognize the concerns about restarting Palisades now?
That was my second question.
The third question is, there was a question earlier about the high rate of thyroid cancer
55 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com in Palisades Park. And the answer was that that information would be used in the baseline. My question about that is: recognizing that the hypothesis is that these thyroid cancers were related to past Palisades operation and nuclear power, how will using that as a baseline also attend to how the cancers were related to previous atomic energy production at Palisades?
Thank you. Those are my three questions.
MS. WILLINGHAM: Regarding your first question, I believe you're asking how we consider their decision to shut down the plant. In the environmental review we do -- that is a business decision -- we're looking at how the restart activities will interface with the environment and those potential impacts.
And then, I believe for the baseline question, what Dan was trying to explain before was that we look at the baseline or what the current condition is. And he was specifically talking about groundwater and the well monitoring. So again, we know that those wells are there and there's the annual reporting, and then, we would look at if there would be any additional impacts if the restart, if that was approved.
56 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com So, I don't know if that helps to clarify that aspect. And I don't know if Dan and/or anybody on the line, like Don, would maybe want to further clarify.
MR. BARNHURST: So, Laura just mentioned Don Palmrose. He's our health physicist and he is one of our technical experts that helps with the human health analysis that's performed as part of our environmental assessment. If he's on the line, again, we would invite him to weigh-in on this.
And while he's doing that, I'd just like to add to something that Laura said, which we did mention groundwater. Again, I will point to that graphic over there that shows all the areas that are considered and just indicate that, you know, there's air quality as well. And there's a number of different environmental pathways where monitoring is involved and where we evaluate past data, again, to understand what the environment is currently before understanding the impacts of the potential actions.
So, maybe I'll pause now and see if Don is on and if he would like to add anything.
MR. PALMROSE: Yes, Dan. This is Don Palmrose. I'm a Senior Reactor Engineer at the NRC.
And with regard to the question about the
57 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com thyroid cancers, I do suggest that you provide that as a comment for us to consider in our review, and include any appropriate data or any of the reports, if they are available.
MS. DOELL: All right. Thank you to Don.
The final person we have for this portion of the meeting is going to be David Kraft.
David, I am enabling your microphone. You should have the ability to ask your question.
MR. KRAFT: Thank you, and good evening.
My question relates to a question that came up earlier, and I would also like to get a clarification on processes moving forward.
The question that came up earlier was about the short timeline that the public would have to make comments of approximately two to three weeks.
And my question is, if I understood you correctly, in this environmental assessment process, NRC staff, among other things, can use previously amassed information or reports or data to reach conclusions in terms of the assessment.
My question comes in about the detail and whether not just the conclusions would be made available, but the actual bases in terms of the studies or reports, or whatever, that justify those
58 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com conclusions. And more importantly, what would be the dates of those studies that the staff will use to make those conclusions?
And I bring this up in the context of timeline. Because if that information isn't made available immediately, the public can't make meaningful comments on whether those conclusions should be challenged as valid or not, and also, make comments about the fact that there is newer information that should supersede the information used by the NRC staff to make their conclusions.
So, I hope I'm being clear on this, but it's a combination of short timeline and having as much information available to the public, detailed information available to the public, as possible from the get-go.
MS. WILLINGHAM: So, thank you for the question.
The answer is, yes, we do provide -- when we write environmental assessments or any of the technical documents, we will provide references to the underlying studies/reports that we are using for the analysis. Most of those are federal or state kind of resources that are already publicly available.
Anything that we reference, we provide the
59 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com dates, the authors, where you can go and find them.
You know, if they're journal articles, you may have to go out and find those yourselves because they're copyrighted, but we do provide the references.
And again, I'll just emphasize that the purpose of this comment period is for you to give us -
- you know, the comments that we want to get from you is to help us to determine the scope of our environmental assessment. So, we want to hear from you what it is that you would like for us to consider.
When we issue the draft EA, we will say what we considered and what references, and then, you would have an opportunity to provide a comment at that time, if you think that we didn't look at something or missed something. That is the entire purpose of having that draft comment period.
MR. KRAFT: Thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay. I'd like to go ahead and move to our commenting portion of the meeting.
As we like to do, we would like to start with any federal or state representatives or representatives of the offices of elected officials.
So, I have a short list of those that we'll get through, and then, I will start the folks that signed up to speak.
60 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com I've got two microphones here. I'm willing to run microphones around to folks, similar to how I did in the clarifying question part of the meeting for this.
So, the first name I have is Ben McLeod with the Office of U.S. Representative Bill Huizenga.
Okay?
MR. MCLEOD: Thank you.
I'm Ben from Congressman Bill Huizenga's office. I want to thank the regulators and stakeholders and the community for showing up.
I have a brief thing to read off.
Congressman Huizenga has been a consistent supporter of repowering Palisades. As the Republican Co-Chair of the Great Lakes Task Force and a member of the Conservative Climate Caucus, Congressman Huizenga is knowledgeable in both environmental and energy policy, which is why he readily recognizes the benefits of restoring 800 megawatts of reliable, safe, carbon-free energy generation and bringing back hundreds of highly skilled jobs right here to Michigan's north district.
With southwest Michigan's fast-growing energy needs, it is also important to note that this historic project lays the groundwork for small modular
61 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com reactors, a key piece of America's energy security future.
As this process moves forward, Congressman Huizenga and our office will remain engaged with stakeholders and decisionmakers from the community level to the federal level to see that we safely reauthorize this key plant for the benefit of southwest Michigan and our Nation.
Thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: Thank you, sir.
Next, I have State Representative Joey Andrews.
MR. ANDREWS: Thank you and welcome to the District also. I represent Covert Township, where Palisades sits. And it was a great effort of mine this year to secure some of the State funding, the
$300 million, to get this plant restarted. I've been a strong proponent of getting the plant back on the grid and the clean energy that it represents.
We passed a climate package in Michigan last year that cannot be met without nuclear power; cannot be met without resources like Palisades coming back on the grid. I believe that we stand no chance of meeting our climate goals as a planet without Palisades, without nuclear energy being brought back
62 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com online.
And as you're considering the environmental impact, I also encourage you to consider the human impact here. Right now, you sit in Benton Township in the greater community of Benton Harbor with a unemployment rate of north of 18 percent -- one of the most impoverished communities in the State.
There were jobs lost in this community in Covert, another economically hard-hit community, when the plant shut down. The restoration of these jobs is meaningful to families here in this community -- in the communities of Covert, Benton Harbor, and Van Buren County, a county not ripe with large economic assets.
What this means to our community and the people who live here goes, I think, beyond the scope of just simple assessments, and the future of our region, the industries that have begun reaching out and looking at our region; the employers that have begun reaching out because we'll have this consistent, reliable electricity and a clean source to power their industries.
And to echo what was just said, the jobs, hundreds of six-figure jobs, hundreds of good-paying jobs, union jobs. These are family-sustaining careers
63 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com for people here, that they can go on and retire from.
So, I encourage you, you know, this project is a huge deal. I know you know that. It's the center of a lot of attention. It's bringing a lot to our communities. But I cannot overstate how critical this is, both to meet our climate goals and for the sustainability of our communities here in southwest Michigan.
Thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay. I've got Josh Prozaki, Office of State Senator Aric Nesbitt.
MR. PROGACKI: All right. Good evening, everyone.
I'm Josh Progacki, District Director for State Senator Aric Nesbitt, who represents most of Allegan, Van Buren, and Berrien Counties. Just a brief statement on behalf of the Senator here.
I want to thank the NRC for hosting today's meeting on this issue of importance to Michigan's energy future. Palisades has long been a provider of reliable, carbon-free energy for southwest Michigan for decades.
Though its early shutdown was announced years ahead of time due to business decisions, it was, nonetheless, a devastating blow to this region as a
64 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com reliable provider of vital energy, jobs, and economic activity.
Palisades has a long and proven history of safe operations, ranked in the NRC's highest safety category. Under Holtec, they've remained good community partners and keep the health of the public and environment paramount.
The folks who work there are experienced and well-qualified, moreover, and as evidenced by some of the commenters we've heard at past meetings -- a lot of community leaders and a lot of folks from around southwest Michigan coming out -- they are our friends and neighbors.
Michigan families need dependable power sources like Palisades to help alleviate high energy prices and provide electricity when the sun doesn't shine or the wind doesn't blow. The last thing Michigan wants is to be in a situation like California, where prices are high and energy insecurity leading to the rapid reopening of shuttered plants is the norm.
Restarting Palisades is not just a matter of our energy supply. It's a matter of ensuring our future. The environmental benefits, combined with the plant's proven safety record, make it a critical asset
65 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com we cannot afford to lose.
Senator Nesbitt urges the NRC to recognize and support the indispensable role of Palisades and its restart here in southwest Michigan.
Thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: And I have one more. Jake Rushlow, Office of State Representative Pauline Wendzel.
Okay. I didn't have to run to the other side this time. Excellent.
MR. RUSHLOW: Good evening. I'm Jake Rushlow and I'm here today on behalf of State Representative Pauline Wendzel. Rep. Wendzel serves as the Republican Vice Chair of the Michigan House Energy Committee and represents portions of Berrien, Van Buren, and Allegan Counties.
First, I want to thank the NRC for hosting today's meeting and for your regulatory oversight that you provide for our country's nuclear industry.
Palisades has a
proven history of providing clean, carbon-free energy to our region for decades. Its long operational history highlights its crucial role in delivering reliable power to our State. Nuclear energy is vital to ensuring Michigan has an adequate power supply to meet the needs of our
66 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com residents. Recently enacted clean energy mandates are unattainable without Palisades in the mix, and frankly, not without more nuclear energy.
Moreover, Palisades provides a reliable baseload power supply. Unlike intermittent and unreliable renewable sources, nuclear power offers a consistent and stable energy output, ensuring that our grid remains robust and reliable. The stability and reliability is vital as our energy portfolio continues to change.
The environmental impact of Palisades is well-understood, thanks to its long history of safe operations. The plant has consistently met stringent safety standards set by the NRC, operating within the Commission's highest safety category. This track record of safety, public transparency, and stewardship provides confidence that the plant can continue to operate without adverse impacts on our community.
Lastly, Palisades is an important part of our community. The plant supports hundreds of high-quality jobs and contributes significantly to the local economy. Its operations generate tax revenues that fund essential public services, further enhancing the quality of life in southwest Michigan.
Restarting Palisades is vital for
67 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com maintaining our supply of clean, carbon-free, and reliable energy. The environmental benefits, coupled with the plant's proven safety record, make it a crucial asset for our community and our energy future.
Rep. Wendzel respectfully urges the NRC to support the restart of the Palisades Nuclear Plant.
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay. Let's go ahead and transition to the sign-in sheets, and also, to our folks that are joining us virtually.
We did have a couple of different sign-in sheets tonight. So, I'm going to kind of rotate back and forth, but, essentially, go in the order that folks signed up.
We ask that folks keep to about three minutes for your comments, and that way, we can get a chance to, hopefully, cycle through everyone who wishes to speak tonight. If we do have time left at the end of the meeting and folks would like another chance at the microphone, if everyone has already had a chance to speak before we close, we're happy to do that. But we want to give as many folks a chance to speak as possible. So again, we ask that you stick to around three minutes or less for your comments.
Again, we are looking, specifically, to hear environmental scoping comments, so helping us
68 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com decide what the scope of the environmental effort should be.
And again, per the slide that we had up, this is certainly not your only way to provide your comments. There are several other ways that you can provide your comments. Tonight, being on the transcript is just one way.
So, I'm going to just kind of go in threes, if you will. So hopefully, that will give you a chance to know that you're kind of on deck or coming up.
The first three speakers I have are Darby Fetzer, Jodi Flynn, and Bruce Fetzer.
So, Darby Fetzer, if you're here, I can run a microphone to you. Okay?
MS. D. FETZER: Good evening. My name is Darby Fetzer. My husband and I live in Kalamazoo County.
Thank you, NRC, for hosting this public hearing and for the opportunity to speak today.
Safe operations and safe nuclear waste storage is paramount for the safety of local residents. For the current and future reputation of nuclear energy, thorough attention to the prevention of any risk is of the utmost importance.
69 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com That said, I'm a huge fan of nuclear energy. Changes in the climate, whether we want to admit it or not, are becoming a reality. A little factoid: temperatures have been recorded around the globe since 1880. The last 10 years are the highest temperatures on record. Global sea levels have risen at least 8 inches since 1880.
You can't turn on the Weather Channel without seeing broad areas of extreme heat, flooding, and deadly tornado and hurricane systems. We're even seeing weather changes in our more protected region of southwest Michigan. In Kalamazoo County, in the last few months, we've seen two major storm systems tear roofs off of houses and businesses and rip old-growth trees out of the ground.
The data clearly points to increased CO2 levels as causal for the changes in climate. I'm a fan of nuclear energy because it's the only reliable source of energy currently available with little to no CO2 emissions.
Today, I look around my neighborhood and I see a majority of neighbors now riding around in electric golf carts, on electric bikes, and electric scooters. With electric cars and trucks coming off the line, the pull on our grid will be more
70 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com significant than ever.
I personally don't want coal and natural gas power companies spewing more CO2 into the atmosphere to provide the power we want and need to fuel our lives.
With the NRC doing all they can to make operations safe, it is time to embrace the clean option: nuclear energy and the reopening of Palisades.
Thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay. And for those of you who are in the room, we are having some fluctuations in power, which is, unfortunately, you know, making the screens and such go on and off. We apologize for that. They're working on it.
Okay. The next person I had was Jodi Flynn, and then, I'm going to go again to Bruce Fetzer, and then, third to Jacqueline Holst.
MS. J. FLYNN: Hi.
Dog-tailing off of what she was saying, I feel like the GAO produced a pretty damning document about the nuclear energy's preparedness for climate change. I feel like it's largely being ignored. I haven't heard any response from the NRC, and particularly, the environmental. I would think that
71 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com it would have the highest priority for you.
I would really appreciate it if you could give some response to that because it does not seem like the nuclear energy, the NRC is making any sort of adjustments into climate change. And maybe you'll say that your external hazards, or whatever, that part, your arm of your -- is addressing it, but I certainly haven't seen anything and I haven't heard one peep from the NRC about the GAO's damning report.
So, I would love to get a commitment from you to respond to that report point-by-point, so that we can feel a little bit safer; that you're actually taking into consideration something that is absolutely critical -- with all that nuclear waste on the shores.
I guess I can't get that commitment. Could I?
MR. RAKOVAN: I'll let you guys respond, if you would like to, but, I mean, it sounds to me like you're making a comment that you'd like to make sure that we're taking into account the GAO report in terms of the work being on this EA.
Laura, do you want to --
MS. WILLINGHAM: I'll just briefly, again, as we explained, as part of the process, we'll look at scoping comments and we will have a response somehow that those were considered in the scope of the
72 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com environmental review.
MR. RAKOVAN: All right. So, I'm going to go to Bruce Fetzer, second to Jacqueline Holst, and third to Alan Blind.
MR. B. FETZER: Hello. My name is Bruce Fetzer. I live in southwest Michigan, south Kalamazoo. I operate a business that actually helps the health of thousands of people. My business actually relies on reliable power.
And I strongly support the reopening of Palisades Nuclear Plant for multiple reasons.
First of all, Palisades would provide reliable, clean baseload power. The restart of Palisades is crucial in the face of impending coal plant shutdowns. The demand for power is rapidly increasing, not just in Michigan, but nationwide.
Wind and solar can't fill that widening gap because reliable electric storage doesn't exist to provide electricity when wind and solar are offline.
I trust the NRC experts also and thank you for the proceeding with the review and the restart of this. And from your presentation tonight, I understand that your review includes social and economic considerations as well.
So, my request in your scoping project is
73 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com to consider the impact of not including reliable baseload power to the tune of 800 megawatts.
Thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay. We'll go to Jacqueline Holst, Alan Blind, and then, we'll go ahead and take a few from the virtual.
MS. HOLST: I'm just curious how we're going to look at a restart that's never been done before and consider that impact to the environment, when it's something that's never happened before.
I also have some concerns that we're doing a lot of new things at one time. Holtec, for example, has never operating a nuclear power plant; the SMRs that we're talking about -- there's just some concerns about a lot of new things.
And we haven't even talked about infrastructure. A tree falls down because the wind blows and nobody has power. So, it's not just making power; it's getting the infrastructure to deliver that power.
I really like tonight I learned the crux is business decision versus human health, and that's really unfortunate that we have to put it in two separate buckets.
Also, talking about the environmental
74 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com baseline, if you've got folks in that area with health problems, I would expect you're using, like, the local health departments and getting data from them, but I didn't hear anything about limits. Like at what point are we going to say that, hey, there's too many health issues; there's too many groundwater issues; this isn't going to work here because of the previous damage done?
I also thought it was interesting that the NRC gets two weeks for typos, but we only get two weeks for public comment on something that I'm not super familiar with.
So again, business decision versus human health; it's unfortunate that's what this is coming to.
MR. RAKOVAN: All right. Our last speaker in the room until we go to virtual is Mr. Blind.
Okay.
And then, Marlayna, we will go ahead and take two hands after Mr. Blind.
MS. DOELL: Uh-hum.
MR. BLIND: Process check first. I want to make sure -- I want to make a comment, but I want to make sure you're okay with it being the scope of the meeting.
75 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com On your slide, I want to comment on the use of the exemption rule. And you do include that in your slide, how it's being used by Holtec to request an exemption for the certification of permanently shutting down the plant.
So, just a process check: am I okay to comment on that here today?
MS. WILLINGHAM: You can provide comments on anything that you feel that the NRC staff should consider as --
MR. BLIND: Okay.
MS.
WILLINGHAM:
part of its environmental review.
MR. BLIND: All right. Thank you.
And also, I've got a longer version of this on the docket. But let me just read my comment, please.
My name is Alan Blind and I'm a resident of Verona, Michigan, and I'm speaking today on behalf of the residents of Palisades Park in Covert, Michigan, some of whom you've heard from already.
Governor Whitmer supported continuing operations at Palisades. Yet, Entergy shut down the plant, surrendered its operating license, and sold the plant as junk suitable only for decommissioning.
76 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com These actions should not be easily reversible.
Holtec has proposed exploiting a loophole from an NRC denial letter concerning a 2019 petition for rulemaking that proposed a fast and easy way to allow it to reload fuel and operate Palisades. And I might add that that earlier petition was denied, but yet, it seems to have standing in these proceedings.
If allowed, this will permit Holtec and NRC to evaluate today's proceedings with very little public involvement under a fast and simple process.
Now, I know we heard earlier that there's going to be a chance for public hearings, but this issue of the exemption rule is everything stands on that. If the exemption rule does not stand, then all this other work falls. It's a house of cards.
This process has already been used to allow the NRC to agree with Holtec's motion for a Secretary order denying public hearings. And the public hearings were on the use of the exemption rule.
And again, if that falls, which we're not allowed to provide comments on, then None of this stands.
The Petitioner appealed the Holtec proposal, and I'll give Kevin recognition that he was the initiator of that petition. The petition appealed the Holtec proposal order to not allow public
77 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com hearings. And in that response, it captures what I want to say today from that motion.
The device of an exemption here today is being invoked to camouflage the actual nature of the request, which is a license amendment. The exemption being sought would relieve Holtec from adhering to the core regulations that the Atomic Energy Act imposes to ensure safe regulation of commercial nuclear power plants and in the interest of the health and safety of the public, as well as environmental protection.
Exemptions are for short-duration bypasses of NRC regulations. They are not for reversing a major licensing event, as Holtec is now using. This request for permission to restart is a major change that requires full-blown licensing proceedings.
Now, back to my comment today -- and I'm almost done. The residents of Palisades Park and I request that the NRC General Counsel approve the current NRC staff's interpretation of the Holtec/NRC's use of the selected words, in part and not in whole, taken out of context of the denial of proposed rulemaking 50-117, dated February 19th, 2019.
As a better approach, we request the NRC agree with our petition for rulemaking to include an NRC Commission-approved process for returning a
78 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com decommissioned plant to operating status. This provides us all the same set of rules for Palisades and for future plants that may be making the same request.
Thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay. Marlayna, let's go ahead and take the first two hands you have virtually to provide comments.
Again, we're looking to keep comments down to approximately three minutes, so we can get as many people through as possible.
MS. DOELL: Thank you, Lance.
And as a reminder to the folks who are virtual, to raise your hand, you are either to use the "Raise Hand" function on Teams, which is also Control-Shift-K or you can hit *5 if you're doing this by phone.
The first two folks that I have in the queue are Connie Kline and Jan Boudart.
Connie, I'm going to go ahead and enable your microphone. You should be able to unmute and make your comment.
MS. KLINE: Can you hear me?
MS. DOELL: Yes, I can.
MS. KLINE: Okay. I actually had my hand
79 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com up for a while during the clarifying questions, which I think this is, but you can stop me, if you want, or you can consider this.
I've always been confused as to where the severe accident mitigation analyses come into play. I know this Palisades situation is so unique, but, in general, will SAMA -- can people comment on SAMA and severe accident mitigation? Will those comments or perhaps questions be considered? And is there overlap between the environmental considerations and the severe accident mitigation analyses? Or will they be considered? Is there an overlap?
I know somebody at the NRC -- I'm not sure
-- maybe 15 minutes ago, mentioned postulated accidents as a considered external hazard.
MR. RAKOVAN: Don Palmrose, are you on by any chance? Would you be able to address this briefly?
(Pause.)
Marlayna, do we have Don with us?
MS. DOELL: Yes, he came off of mute, but I cannot hear him. So, he may be having some audio issues.
MR. RAKOVAN: Yes, it's not a great sign when unmuted and the NRC folks are having issues with
80 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com Teams.
MS. DOELL: We're going to try to get Don back on here in the next --
MR. PALMROSE: Can you hear me now??
MS. DOELL: Oh, there he is.
MR. RAKOVAN: There you go. Go ahead, Don.
MR. PALMROSE: Yes, I guess my computer has been having some problems with --
MR. RAKOVAN: Can you address that?
MR. PALMROSE: Yes. My computer has been having some problems with the headsets and that.
Yes. So, severe accident mitigation alternatives is one of the review areas that will be addressed in this review.
MS. DOELL: Thank you, Don.
Next in the queue, we have Jan Boudart.
Jan, I'm going to go ahead and give you the ability to unmute your microphone. You should be able to come off mute and make your comment.
MS. BOUDART: I would like to postpone my comment until later, please.
MS. DOELL: All right. We should be able to do that.
Lance, do you want me to take one more off
81 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com the line, then?
MR. RAKOVAN: Yes, go ahead.
MS. DOELL: All right. Next in the queue is Kraig Schultz.
Kraig, I'm going to go ahead and give you the ability to unmute your microphone.
Oh, dear, I just lost Kraig. I'm sorry.
Michael McLean, I believe you are next in the queue. You should now have the ability to unmute your microphone. I apologize for the quick turnaround there.
MR. MCLEAN: Hi. Thank you, NRC Staff.
Thank you so much for sticking around so late. I really appreciate it.
I also want to say thank you to the state representatives and federal elected officials that are in attendance as well. I've been watching this over from where I sit here in Chicago, Illinois, and it's awesome to see the cooperation, bipartisan cooperation, that made this happen.
And I want to give a comment just urging the NRC to account for the benefits of nuclear energy, while it's also going to be addressing the risks of it as well. I live in Chicago, where our grid right now is powered by 73 percent nuclear energy. We have 10
82 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com reactors that feed my grid.
And I'm an independent nuclear energy supporter, where I just love to have the cheap electricity that's clean. I'm going to be living here for a long time and I'm going to be experiencing the impact of climate change. And luckily, nuclear energy is a great way to address that. And so, I really hope that the NRC takes that into account. We should be taking a cost-benefit analysis to this.
So, thank you.
MS. DOELL: Thank you.
Lance, I think back to you guys in the room.
And, Kraig, I apologize. That was completely a user error on my end for booting you instead of unmuting you. I will have you up next when we return to virtual comments. And again, my apologies. I just hit the wrong button.
MR. RAKOVAN: All right. Thanks, Marlayna.
I'll go ahead. The next three that I have are Kathryn Barnes with Don't Waste Michigan; Mila Chappell, Van Buren County Commissioner, and I believe it's Cindy Cordell, Palisades Park Country Club.
So again, starting with Kathryn Barnes.
83 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com MS. BARNES: Yes, thank you for letting me speak.
I've got two major concerns: tritium underneath the plant and, also, the plant is embrittled. It's a ticking time bomb. No matter how many repairs that should have been done before are done to the plant, it's never going to be safe because it's old; it's embrittled. It has little fissures in there from all the nuclear reactions that it's gone through, and you shouldn't ever take a risk that huge to start it up.
The other
- thing, Holtec is not experienced. They're doing a horrible job with the nuclear reactors that they're dismantling. I can't believe that anybody is as sloppy and irresponsible as the way they're doing things -- just slamming things around, and they want to dump nuclear waste into Cape Cod, nuclear waste into the Hudson River, nuclear waste into Lake Michigan probably. So, I don't think they should be allowed to take over such a risky business.
And also, people talking about nuclear energy as if it's clean and green, give me a break.
They mine that stuff. They use fossil fuels to mine it. It's a hot process. People die. And they
84 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com transport it. That's fossil fuels. They refine it.
That's fossil fuels.
All along the whole cycle of nuclear power is death. The ultimate end is nuclear war, when you get the plutonium which is too hot to handle.
They don't know how to safely store nuclear waste. It shouldn't be transported. They have problems with the casks. They've had explosions.
They have contaminations. They have stillbirths.
Child mortality rates go up when those things operate and cancer rates. They're not safe.
You talk about jobs. Do you really want to have somebody have a job where they're going to get cancer or where they're going to have birth defective kids, where they're going to lose their lives, where they're going to die young?
One of my relatives is a young guy. He's an electrician. And he went in to work in a nuclear power plant and he only could work for a couple of hours because he dosed out the dose meter. They have a high turnover rate because these guys are getting dosed with radiation. They say, "Don't go in that corner, that wet stuff over there. That's a mess.
Stay away from that."
You know, so these plants, DC Cook,
85 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com Palisades, all these don't have the track records.
They should not be allowed to destroy the records.
Everything is, if you followed the history of Palisades, it's got a really horrible track record.
It almost had a meltdown, five minutes to a meltdown, because they had a bad sump pump. They took it out and they ran it with another sump pump without backup. So, when the sump pump failed, they didn't have another sump pump. And so, they brought in all these engineers. They decided to put the one that was in pieces together and put it back on, but it was like five minutes to a meltdown.
And it really didn't make it into the news, but we have come so close to meltdowns in Michigan. Fermi, that almost had a meltdown. There's a book. They almost lost Detroit.
These things are just deadly. And also, you've got these things like earthquakes, tsunamis, all these climatic things. You know, you just can't count that, even if everybody does a good job, you can't count that these things are going to be safe.
You know they're not. You know they're a risk, and it's not worth the risk. You know? It's a stupid way to make energy.
Nuclear is hot. When you make a nuclear
86 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com reactor, it heats up so much, they have to dump it down in the water to make steam, back and forth. It's hot. If you've ever seen radioactive waste, it has heat rising up out of it. The whole thing is hot.
Native Americans say, "Leave it in the ground," and I think that's what you should do. Leave the radioactivity in the ground and the uranium rocks, and do something better. That's the worst thing you can do for everybody.
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay. Thank you.
- Again, we're going to go to Mila Chappell, then to Cindy Cordell, and third, to Sean Connors.
Okay. All right. You go first.
MR. CHAPPELL: Hi. I am Mike Chappell, County Commissioner for Van Buren County. I just had a few comments.
With our growing rate of dependence on electricity, it is more important than ever to support Holtec in their efforts to reopen Palisades for the safe, reliable, carbon-free power that it will be able to provide to all of us.
This nuclear power would enhance our energy security by diversifying the energy mix and by reducing our dependence on imported energy sources.
87 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com This would also decrease or eliminate power supply disruptions and help mitigate climate change.
In addition to the safe, clean energy, Palisades has always been a great corporate citizen.
They provide our region with hundreds of high-paying jobs and tax revenues that are vital to our communities and public services.
The Van Buren County Board of Commissioners voted to support this historic effort by Holtec.
And I just wanted to thank the NRC for your time and transparency and for putting these meetings together.
MR. RAKOVAN: Thank you. And I apologize.
I really thought it was an L-A, not K-E. So, my apologies. I warned you all that I might be slaughtering your names.
Okay. Let's go to, I believe, Cindy Cordell, and then, Sean Connors, and third, to Tom Flynn.
MS. CORDELL: Thank you.
This is Cindy Cordell. I'm in Palisades Park.
I just want to say -- and I've heard it said many times tonight -- this is unprecedented.
88 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com This is plant that's been shut down, and then, you're going to build it back up. So, I really encourage you during your scope to really take that perspective, especially on some of these safety issues.
I heard from many Representatives, they're saying how it's safe, safe, safe. You know, in 2012, the NRC actually rated Palisades one of the four worst-performing safety plants in the Nation. So, there's been safety issues.
Also, in the perspective, because they knew they were shutting down, there were some significant safety issues that weren't addressed as adequately as if it was going to continue to run.
So, please keep your perspective in your scoping to look at this is unprecedented. And I do encourage you to get it right. Because I agree that we do need alternative sources for energy, and this is the first plant that's been shut down, and then, going to go back up.
And I have heard -- and, you know, you can clarify me, if I'm wrong or not -- but the rules, there is no roadmap for this because you've never done it. There's no roadmap for a plant that's been shut down, and now, how are we going to restart on environmental safety evaluations?
89 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com So, when you do this roadmap, let's make sure it's at least as critical as if plant was just getting recertified.
Because this plant is unprecedented. Shut down. Now, you know, all these safety issues. It is an old plant.
And so, I just hope keeping that scope and that perspective on how you unique this is and how it will impact probably the future when plants have to restart up.
Thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: Thank you.
All right. We'll go to Sean Connors; second, to Tom Flynn, and then, we'll go ahead and take a few folks from the Teams meeting.
MR. CONNORS: I'm Sean Connors. I'm a retired business owner from Kalamazoo, Michigan.
And I'd like to thank the NRC staff here tonight for your service and for hosting this event.
I had some remarks I wrote down, but listening to the comments, I decided to just talk from my heart.
I advocate for nuclear energy. I didn't start off that way. Palisades started operations when I was a freshman in high school in Kalamazoo. And I have some friends that worked for many years to try to
90 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com get the plant shut down. And I still like my friends.
I just disagree with them about this plant.
One of the reasons I like nuclear energy is I owned publishing business where we would go in and do communications inside of other businesses. And one of my clients was Sandia Laboratories. And I was having lunch with some of those guys. And if you've ever seen the Far Side cartoons -- are you familiar with those? -- they actually looked like that at Sandia Labs when I was there in the '90s. And I was telling them I was nervous about Palisades and they started to reassure me a little bit about nuclear energy.
And I didn't buy into it immediately. I just started reading and ramping up a little more and getting more involved. And by the time I sold my business in 2016, I decided I wanted to spend my retirement advocating for nuclear energy.
And before that, I was somewhat agnostic.
But what really turned me towards it was 70 years, for 70 years in this country, we now have experience with fission. The worst accidents we have had in the United States was at Three Mile Island. And it was an accident. It was and it was serious, but no one was killed. No one was injured.
91 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com All the safety support worked just like it did, or it was supposed to. The radiation was contained within the containment vessel. If you got any radiation, you had to be on the fenceline when they let some of the hydrogen loose. You would have got as much as a dental x-ray. And that's the worst accident we've had in the United States.
There are going to be accidents with every source of power. If you do not want nuclear power, you have to think very carefully about what power you do want.
Michigan is going to shut down 6 gigawatts of coal power by 2033. Ladies and gentlemen, this State is going to start having blackouts.
I feel really bad for the people that are fighting with thyroid cancer. I hope you look into every possible cause that could be causing that thyroid cancer in your park. But I doubt very much it's Palisades Nuclear Plant.
Tritium is a radioactive substance. It's created in the atmosphere above us. When a proton from the sun hits a nitrogen molecule, you create tritium.
Tritium coming out of a nuclear reactor is in such low doses, that the tritium they put in the
92 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com water in Japan, after it was all treated and all they had left in the water was tritium, because you can't get it out, I would have drank that water if they had let me rather than pour it in the ocean.
Nuclear energy is the safest possible source of power we can have and it is clean. Sure, we create a little CO2 when we mine for uranium and we move things around.
And the waste is safe. It's not waste.
I'm glad that we have it set in these casks because there's so much energy left in it, that we're going to use that supposedly waste in advanced reactors, and we'll run our country for hundreds of more years on that nuclear waste. It's not waste; it's a national treasure.
And it just sits on what amounts to about a half a football field here at Palisades. For 50 years of operation, we have like -- what? -- 22 casks.
That's because nuclear power traps all of its waste before it goes into the atmosphere. Every ounce of waste coming out of a nuclear plant is accounted for.
So, for these reasons, I advocate for nuclear energy. You're never going to make all these anti-nuclear people happy. They'll want more details.
They'll want more time. They'll want another foot of
93 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com cement. It's never going to end.
We're at the point we need energy now.
It's a bipartisan issue. And the reason this plant is going to be reopened is because this is what the people want to happen.
Thank you very much.
MR. RAKOVAN: Let's go to Tom Flynn, and then, we'll take a couple from the virtual Teams.
MR. T. FLYNN: Thank you.
My name is Tom Flynn. I'm a resident of Palisades Park. I'll make it quick because my comments parallel Cindy Cordell's very closely.
First of all, I would like it to be known that Palisades Park was formed in 1905, and a lot of the families that started it back then are still around. So, we've been there and on this property all that time.
I can certainly understand the NRC's granting of exceptions to Entergy for key safety features because they're very close to the end of their operating life. And so, as just a person in the public, I can sort of understand that thinking, where you're not going to make this huge financial investment if they're going to close down in five years or 10 years, or whatever.
94 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com But there's no way this plant should restart if it doesn't meet the current safety standards. And it's well-documented, lots of systems that they've got exceptions on, and those should all be put back in place. And this plant should be as safe as any new plant coming online. And really, to impact their environmental assessment if they're not, that's going to have a huge influence on your assessment and your findings.
Thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: Marlayna, go ahead, please.
If we could take the first two hands?
MS. DOELL: All right. Absolutely.
We're going to return to Kraig Schultz who I
so unceremoniously bumped from the meeting accidentally earlier. Kraig, again, my apologies for that.
And you should have the ability to unmute your microphone and make your comments.
MR. SCHULTZ: Hello. Can you hear me?
MS. DOELL: Yes, I can.
MR. SCHULTZ: I am Kraig Schultz of Michigan Safe Energy Future. I live 50 miles from the plant with my family in Robinson Township.
I would like to thank you for having this
95 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com meeting.
And over the last decade, I think I've attended pretty much every public meeting at Palisades by the company or by the NRC. And I've noticed a disturbing trend, and that is what I'm very concerned about. And this is my comment:
Well, first of all, please consider the environmental impact of, both the financial and the environmental impact of the Chernobyl and Fukushima disasters and place those right here in west Michigan, and think about the damage that it would do to the drinking water for millions of people and what it would do to our agriculture, and what it would to us financially.
We don't want to have a nuclear disaster anywhere. But the reason that I want you to include that in your scope is to consider what would happen if we had that scale of a disaster here, if we had a spent fuel fire or if we had a loss-of-coolant accident. And what would it do?
And the reason I'm concerned about a disaster is because I see that we're cutting corners and we're trying to rush this plant that has operated nearly 50 years back into production. And yet, we have hundreds of millions of dollars of public funds
96 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com to do it right. We could do the repairs. We should do the repairs. We should do a very thorough environmental evaluation and really consider the risk versus the reward.
And the reason that we have the safety record we have in this country and in our U.S.
military is because of our adherence to strict safety protocols. And when we're shortcutting and giving exemption after exemption to the license, that's just going to get us into trouble.
So, as we embark on another -- you know, Holtec has said that they are going to pursue a license past 2031 -- you know, if we're really going to embark on another 50 years of trying to operate these plants, something no one has ever done, we need to really be doubling-down and actually increasing our regulation to make sure that we don't have a nuclear disaster here or anywhere in the world.
Thank you.
MS. DOELL: All right. Thank you so much.
Next in the queue is Stephanie Bilenko.
I'm going to enable your microphone. You should be able to unmute and make your comment, and please remember to state your name and affiliation, if so chosen, for the record.
97 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com MS. BILENKO: Can you hear me?
MS. DOELL: Yes, we can.
MS. BILENKO: My name is Stephanie Bilenko.
On January 27th, 2021, President Biden issued Executive Order 14008, which was titled, "Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad." The White House Council, the White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council, shortened to WHEJAC, was established to advise and to increase the federal government's efforts to address environmental injustice.
WHEJAC's efforts would include a broad range of strategic, scientific, technological, regulatory, community engagement, and economic issues related to environmental justice.
On May 13th of 2021, WHEJAC listed examples of the types of projects that would not benefit a community. No. 4 on that list was the procurement of nuclear power. No. 5 was its research and development.
WHEJAC, then, recommended, in September of 2023, that the federal government stop supporting nuclear power through loan guarantees and other financial incentives and create plans to decommission
98 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com all nuclear power plants at the end of their current licensing terms.
And in order to better understand that nuclear is not carbon-free energy, WHEJAC recommends that a 35,000-year life cycle carbon assessment be completed for all nuclear power plants, including micronuclear. This study will aim to evaluate their true carbon emissions resulting from: one, the building and maintenance of the plants; two, mining of uranium, and three, long-term storage and management of spent nuclear fuel.
However, their suggestions were not adhered to. The Inflation Reduction Act designated $6 billion in studies and $3.5 billion for research and development for nuclear energy. The Build Back Better was in $35 billion in subsidies.
Seems that there is no shortage of snake oil in America. The nuclear industry has bamboozled the government to decree that nuclear is the elixir of life.
That's my statement.
MS. DOELL: Thank you very much.
And just for the return after the break, we'll have Ann Frisch and Jacqueline Drechsler will be our next two speakers after we return to the room.
99 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com And I believe that's the next step, Lance.
MR. RAKOVAN: All right. Let's go ahead and take another round of speakers here in the room.
The first one, it looks like Bette or Betty Peerman, followed by Ed Rivet, and third, Wally Taylor.
MS. PEERMAN: Thank you again.
I have several concerns and a lot of them have to do with the degraded condition of the plant and the lack of repairs that were done. But many people have addressed those issues.
So, I'm going to skip over to the fact that everyone talks about this being a clean energy process, except that nobody's addressing the fact that we are, when it is in operation, producing highly toxic, radioactive waste that has to be stored on the shore, and it's an unstable shore -- a sandy, movable dunes, unstable shore that we are planning on storing this waste. I hope you're considering that.
And if you aren't from the area, you should know that we had a whole town disappear. It was buried in sand not too far from here and around Saugatuck. So, I want you to consider that. We have high wave damage that also will affect the sand and movable sand.
100 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com But the other issue that nobody is talking about is moving that highly toxic, radioactive waste.
Right now, they don't have a storage place that's available for it, but they have talked about moving, when they do, moving this waste through rails, through barges, and using barges on Lake Michigan to move that waste.
And I want you to consider, please consider, if we have highly toxic, radioactive nuclear waste being transported on barges on Lake Michigan in high seas, when we have had so many shipwrecks in the Great Lakes, what impact that's going to have on this freshwater system if we dump a barge loaded with highly toxic, radioactive waste.
So, that's all I have to say for the time being and I'll put more in comments, written. Thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: All right. Again, I'd like to go to Ed Rivet; second, to Wally Taylor, and third, to Bruce Davis.
MR. RIVET: Good evening. My name is Ed Rivet. I am the Executive Director of the Michigan Conservative Energy Forum. We are a policy advocacy nonprofit organization based in Lansing.
And for over a decade, MICEF has advocated
101 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com for policies that will facilitate an advanced clean energy system that will provide grid, economic, and national security while reducing pollution as much as possible. We promote a diversified energy portfolio, of which nuclear energy can and should be an important part.
MICEF also played an important role in the formation last year of the bipartisan, bicameral Nuclear Legislative Caucus in the State Legislature, and we did advocate in Lansing for the $300 million in State funds dedicated to bringing Palisades back online.
As proponents of electrifying vehicles and our buildings and foreseeing the evolving energy demands that are coming from data centers that utilize artificial intelligence technology, we know that demand for electricity is going to steadily increase over time.
Michigan needs more energy and it should be from sources without carbon emissions to the greatest extent possible. We do have targets for clean energy production in our State laws and they will be impossible to meet without nuclear energy.
And with this hearing being focused on potential environmental impact, I would like to
102 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com discuss what are the environmental benefits, the beneficial impacts of carbon-reduced energy generation that would come from Palisades.
Everything we can do to supply energy without direct carbon emissions to the atmosphere helps us combat the cumulative impact of greenhouse gas emissions. If we have Palisades' clean energy powering EVs, like the one that I drove here, it takes emissions out of both generation and transportation.
That is a double environmental benefit.
And even more promising as an environmental benefit for this energy would be to couple the energy from Palisades with storage, so that its full capacity during low-demand periods could be leveraged during the peak demand periods. That is another double benefit. Shaving peak load and avoiding the deployment of fossil peaker plants will be a very valuable environmental win.
The importance of the cumulative benefits of every megawatt of carbon-reduced energy cannot be overstated. And MICEF is also a leading facilitator of siting large-scale wind and solar projects across this State. I have solar panels at my house.
But I can tell you that, if you have to consider the impacts of alternatives -- and someone
103 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com mentioned earlier the impact of having solar and the volume to equal Palisades' 800 megawatts, and they, unfortunately, pretty vastly underestimated it. It would be almost 10,000 acres of farmland to produce the same amount of energy with solar that Palisades would.
Now, we're all good with solar, even 10,000 acres worth, but you do have to understand that alternatives, which I heard you earlier say is part of your assessment, that alternatives include thousands and thousands of acres for solar. And we do like that. We're fine with that.
Another alternative to not restarting Palisades, though, means that we will be extending our reliance on fossil generations for many years longer than necessary, and that is a high opportunity cost we need not pay. We should not leave these environmental benefits on the table in producing energy without direct carbon emissions to the atmosphere.
Thank you very much.
MR. RAKOVAN: Thank you.
Okay. Let's go to Wally Taylor, Bruce Davis, and then, Zach Morris.
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you.
I'm Wally Taylor. I'm an attorney
104 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com representing Beyond Nuclear and Don't Waste Michigan.
Restarting a closed nuclear plant that's in decommissioning mode is an unprecedented undertaking. It has never been done before. So, restarting Palisades is a much more significant project than a 20-year license extension, for example.
But a license extension requires a supplemental SEIS, not an EA. So, the NRC and Holtec should not be able to get by with just an EA.
In fact, what Holtec must do is apply for an entirely new operating license. It requires a completely new EIS. That's because Entergy, the previous owner of Palisades, ceased using its operating license in 2022 -- partly because of safety and economic concerns. Entergy, then, was given a position only licensed to proceed with decommissioning Palisades. It's the position only licensed that Holtec now has.
There's no procedure in the NRC rules for reinstating the operating license. The only procedure in the rules, once the operating license ceases, is to continue decommissioning and, ultimately, formally terminating the license, pursuant to 10 CFR Section 50.82, Subsection 9.
And even if we assume this is only a
105 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com license renewal, the NRC's own regulations dictate the preparation of an SEIS at 10 CFR Section 51.20(b),
which states, "The following types of actions require an Environmental Impact Statement or a supplement to Environmental Impact Statement." Among those are:
the "Issuance or renewal of a full power or design capacity license to operate a nuclear power reactor."
There's no question that Holtec is requesting a license renewal, because in The Federal Register notice for this meeting, the NRC said that granting Holtec's request would allow Palisades to, quote, "resume power operations through March 24 of 2031, the end of the renewed operating license." End of quote. So, the NRC is admitting, in their terms, this is a license renewal, and that would require an SEIS, not an EA.
Aside from the clear dictates of these regulations, an SEIS is, nevertheless, warranted based on the magnitude of the project as an unprecedented restart from shutdown and all other environmental impacts.
These include, among others, embrittlement of the reactor core and problems with the steam generators that have been there for years; the thermal pollution and greenhouse gas effects of the water
106 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com vapor from the cooling tower; the need to seriously consider alternative sources, mainly, renewable energy; the effects of earthquakes -- it's my understanding this area may be in an earthquake fault -- and the serious problem of generating even more nuclear waste that we don't know what to do with.
And I've heard tonight that the NRC may rely on the 2006 SEIS that was prepared for the license extension for Palisades, but NEPA regulations require that you cannot rely on outdated information, and that's what that would be.
For all those reasons, the NRC should be doing at least an SEIS, but we think even a completely new EIS rather than an EA.
Thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: All right. Let's go to Bruce Davis, then, Zach Morris, and I'm going to go ahead and sneak George Sleeper in before we go to the virtual folks as well.
So, Bruce Davis?
DR. DAVIS: I'm Bruce Davis again. I'm a resident of Palisades Park, which abuts the nuclear power plant.
First and foremost, before I start, I want to submit the signatures of the homeowners of
107 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com Palisades Park endorsing Mr. Alan Blind's proposal for rulemaking.
Secondly, I'd like to say, as Tom said, our development there has been there as a nature sanctuary since 1905. We didn't choose Palisades Nuclear Plant as a neighbor; they took our land by eminent domain. So, we had no choice in the matter, except to sell properties that have been in the families for years and move out of there, if we didn't want to be subjugated to the problems than can be associated.
There has been, as I've previously stated, a big problem with cancer in the community, and that needs to be addressed. And it's largely because of the poor maintenance, the poor build in the first place.
And so, you guys have this big job in front of you. This is going to be the first plant in the world to potentially come back online. And there's a big onus on you guys to do it, and do it right, and give a model to everyone else that tries to do it.
We sit on 20 percent of the world's freshwater -- 20 percent. That gives more than 40 million here and in Canada drinking water every day.
108 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com I have to test my well at my expense for tritium to make sure that I am [not] drinking this stuff.
And I just saw the report the other day.
There's two wells, 117 and 118, I believe, that are putting out a hell of a lot of tritium, and that's getting into the groundwater.
And per one of the other respondent's requests -- I think it was the woman over here -- that needs to be solved before this plant goes back online.
You can't be spilling stuff. And if this guy back here wants to drink tritium water, take him to the well. I don't want to drink that stuff.
The other thing I would urge you to do --
you know, back when our houses were built in Palisades, there was no building code. Back when this plant was built, there really was no building code.
Okay? We learned and we developed building codes over the years by looking at bad things that happened.
Bad things have happened in Fukushima, Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and we've learned from those mistakes. One of the biggest things, somebody mentioned there was a near-meltdown in Palisades because of a sump pump. That is absolutely true. The previous owner was supposed to fix that.
They only had 5 square feet of sump action
109 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com to get that water. The thing from the NRC before said they needed 3,000 or 5,000 square feet. I don't know what the exact number was, but incredibly --
incredibly -- under-engineered.
And those things have to be addressed and be taken care of. You know, Edmund Burke said, "Those who don't learn from history will be condemned to repeat it." Do we want to be the next Chernobyl? I don't think so. I don't.
We need to make sure we do it, get it right. And I would charge you, your body, to codify what the building standards are for present-day plants. This plant, just because it's being brought back online, shouldn't have to have lesser safety standards than a new plant being built.
MR. RAKOVAN: All right. We're going to go to Zach Morris, then, George Sleeper. We'll take two from the Teams, and then, we'll go ahead and finish up with the rest of the folks that I have signed up to speak here in the room.
MR. MORRIS: Well, good evening. Zach Morris with Market One. We're the economic development organization for Cass and Van Buren Counties.
Thank you for coming here to talk about
110 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com this project.
- This, from an economic development standpoint, is enormously impactful. We know the numbers, $10 million in tax base for the County, $75 million in payroll, and $300 million in economic regional impact. Those are big numbers and make a big difference for the people who live here.
But what I want to talk about, baseload generation. From an economic developer's standpoint, I'm getting on a regular basis inundated with requests for hundreds of megawatts for data centers. And if you think this is going to go away anytime soon, take a look at your phone and think about the last time megapixels actually went down, not up, with the latest generation of your phone. And then, we have AI coming online.
So, data centers are only getting bigger.
They're asking for more energy all the time. We need baseload generation, especially with the numbers we're talking about with coal. We're bringing coal off.
Those are gigawatts and we're adding gigawatts back on. Those numbers just don't add up in a positive direction for our grid. And if we're going to have reliability, which is the hallmark of America, then we need to make sure that we are doing the responsible
111 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com thing, bringing baseload generation on, along with these other sources of generation, such as solar and wind.
So, I leave it at that. Support this project and appreciate it. Thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: All right. Again, I'd like to go to George Sleeper before we take a couple of comments from the virtual, and we'll come back and finish up the folks that I have signed up on my sign-up sheets.
MR. SLEEPER: Thank you.
I'm George Sleeper. I'm here representing the South Haven City Council, which is voicing our support for the restart of Palisades. The City Council approved a resolution supporting the restart of Palisades, and I have confidence that the NRC, the DOE, and Holtec will do everything they need to, to ensure acceptable environmental impact associated with the restart.
Thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay. Marlayna, why don't we go ahead and take two from Teams? And then, we'll go ahead and come back and finish up with the speakers that we have here in the room.
MS. DOELL: All right. Sounds good.
112 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com And we have, yes, six people total that are in the queue online.
The next two speakers are going to be Ann Frisch and Jacqueline Drechsler.
Ann, I'm going to go ahead and give you the ability to unmute your microphone. You should be able to come off of mute and make your comments.
(Pause.)
We'll circle back with Ann and hope that she's have more luck finding the unmute button.
So, Jacqueline, I'm going to go ahead and give you the ability to unmute your microphone as well. If you'd like to come off mute and give your comments, and please remember to state your name for the record.
MS. DRECHSLER: Yes. Hello. Thank you for this opportunity to speak.
My name is Jacqueline Drechsler. I live in Rockland County, New York, across from Indian Point.
So, my comments are about three-four minutes. I hope that's okay.
I appreciate the other people who have spoken today, and I would just like to say this:
On July 10th, just a day ago, there was an
113 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com article by Evan Halper on The Washington Post. He was present at a nuclear industry meeting in Las Vegas.
Here's a quote from Holtec's Patrick O'Brien. Quote: "We will keep the plant in a condition where anything we do can be reversed." End quote.
This plant needs to [be] reversed -- back to closed, shut down, and decommissioned. When it was shut down in 2022, supposedly, because, quote, "the electricity it produced cost too much," end quote, it was also shut down because it was, and still is, the most compromised of any power plant in the United States.
Neutron-embrittled
- reactor, pressure vessels, steam generators, inadequate sump pumps, compromised reactor head or lid -- no one knows which that one is -- so unsafe and compromised, so expensive to fix that the plant shut down early.
We've heard that the hundreds of millions of dollars given by the State to Holtec will not be used for the purpose of fixing things for safety. No plans to fix.
Mr. Nick Culp of Holtec recently stated that they, Holtec, no longer have plans to repair or replace. That means the dangerous, degraded steam
114 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com generator, all of these other things I mentioned.
This means more money in their pockets and more risk to the public.
One week after Holtec purchased the Palisades plant, as decommissioning licensees, they submitted an application to the NRC to become licensed operators. Yes, a totally inexperienced company wants to operate a plant that is so compromised it was shut down early.
Yet, Holtec's spokesman Patrick O'Brien was quoted as saying, "This is not something we expected to do." Unquote. What a lie. They had the paperwork ready to go.
Holtec is a notoriously cheap, dangerous, financially corrupt, and 100 percent inexperienced company that flouts NRC's safety rules and puts workers in risky positions, exposing them to radiation. Everything this company does is in redacted form, relying on, quote, "proprietary," end quote, information and forgiveness by the NRC stamped all over it.
The real risk of radioactive releases into the Great Lakes must be taken into serious deliberation. Radioactive waste, including from tritium and strontium-90, among other radionuclides,
115 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com have consequences to the health and safety of the waters, the environment, and to the people.
The Great Lakes comprise 20 percent of the world's fresh drinking water -- with 16 million people alone in Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin drinking and using this water every day and with 40 million people all together using it.
The effects of radiation are known to cause thyroid cancer and other cancers and illnesses.
And these waters contaminate fish that people eat.
And these waters are also used for irrigation for farming for foods that people eat.
And the waste is being stored on unstable shores. Add in the issues of unsafe storage of nuclear waste onsite and the potential of fuel from SMRs, and we have a potential catastrophe waiting to happen. Add in the effects of climate change on nuclear reactors and triple the risk.
I and others are very upset, furious, to know that Holtec's intention is to buy every site they can, restart if they can; if not, repopulate sites with SMRs -- all done with ratepayer and taxpayer money, and the taxpayer gifted to Holtec --
MS. DOELL: Ms. Drechsler, we're just about at three minutes.
116 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com MS. DRECHSLER: I'm sorry?
MS. DOELL: You're just over three minutes. If you wouldn't mind wrapping up your comments in the next few seconds?
MS. DRECHSLER: Okay. So, you know what?
I will just jump to the very end here.
You, the NRC, are now promoted to being promoters of nuclear energy and you still have the mandate to protect
- health, safety, and the environment. Right now, you are playing with fire and playing with our lives -- all for a company with no transparency, redacted paperwork, and that is known for its grift, graft, and greed.
The proposed restart requires a thorough EIS to make sure that all stakeholders' voices are heard, reviewing social and economic harms, as well as tribal nations' voices must be heard. We cannot believe that this restart does not require an EIS, according to the NRC.
Bruce Davis said, "We have to do this right." Well, I say, why do it at all? Shut it down.
Thank you very much.
MS. DOELL: Thank you very much.
I'll return to Ann Frisch. If you're able to unmute your microphone and make your comments, now
117 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com is your opportunity. If not, I'll put you back in the queue and we'll try again on the next round.
(Pause.)
All right. I'm not hearing anything from Ann.
The next person in the queue is a phone-in caller with the last four digits 7056. If you are available, you should be able to unmute your microphone using *6, if you are on your phone. Please introduce yourself and feel free to make your comment.
MR. KRAFT: Thank you very much.
I'm Dave Kraft, Director of Nuclear Energy Information Service, based in Chicago.
We, of course, are very concerned about the Palisades proposed relicensing, because we share a drinking water supply, and because you guys provide us with terrific blueberries, which we really appreciate.
I wanted to get this comment out verbally because a lot of the misinformation I've heard, and mixed mischaracterization about renewal energies availability, and reliability.
But
- also, I
will write this out specifically as a task for the NRC examiners, in terms of doing a time and cost comparison since you're required to evaluate alternatives to the Palisades
118 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com reopening.
I wanted to point out that last year, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, FERC, announced that in the cue waiting to be connected to the power grid, roughly 2,600 gigawatts of power.
About 80-85 percent of that is solely renewables, which means there's roughly 1,900 gigawatts of power in various stages of development from renewables, solar, wind, and battery storage, things like that, that are not connected to the grid but could be.
We need to do a time and cost comparison as to whether it is much more efficient, improve the reliability and the power availability of power in Michigan, to actually go ahead and get some of those renewables connected to the grid.
Now, the 1,800 megawatts nationwide, is roughly 20 times the entire output of every operating nuclear plant in the country today.
I don't know what Michigan's percentage of that is, but it certainly would be something that has to be examined by the NRC, if it's going to make an appropriate economic evaluation of the opening of Palisades.
I would also point out for those
119 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com Michiganders who have been misinformed about renewable energy, that in the first third of this year, the energy information agency of the government announced that solar and wind alone, the power output exceeds the entire output of all of the operating nuclear reactors in the United States.
So if you're talking about reliability and availability of power, the information you have had and I've heard tonight, is incredibly out of date if not deliberately misleading.
So, to summarize specifically, I will be looking for the NRC's comments on the facilitating the connection of renewable energy, energy storage, and transmission improvements to the grid as an alternative to Palisades.
And that is another aspect is transmission. It doesn't matter if you have a million wind turbines or a million nuclear reactors. If you don't have a viable transmission system to conduct it, it's all useless.
And there are technologies are available such as reconductoring, grid resiliency solutions, which could double the entire capacity of the existing grid we have, without having to put any new lines up.
So from a standpoint of jobs, from a
120 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com standpoint of reliability, from a standpoint of power availability, there are many alternatives that Michigan should be looking into instead of lavishing tens, if not hundreds of millions of dollars, on a speculative reopening of a nuclear reactor.
I'll put some of this in writing to make it a little more clear, but I will expect that to be in the final analysis.
So, thank you for your time.
MS. DOELL: Thank you, Mr. Kraft.
Lance, we'll go back to you in the room.
We have four more individuals that have called in.
Two of them we've tried in the past with no success, but next on deck will be, who I believe is Michael Keegan calling in at 1441, and Jan Boudart.
And then we'll try our friends that weren't able to join us originally. But back to you guys in the room for now.
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay, thanks, Marlayna.
I'm going to go ahead and try to get through the remainder of the speakers that have signed up, starting with Daywi Cook from Covert Township, then Kate Hosier, from the City of South Haven, and third to Jonathan Current, IBEW.
MS. COOK: Thank you, Daywi Cook, Covert
121 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com Township supervisor.
Covert Township unanimously passed a resolution in support of the re-powering of Palisades.
My family has been in Covert Township since 1924.
So, we have multiple generations of my family who has grown up with the nuclear power plant in our backyard. And, I can tell you my personal experience has been nothing but positive.
So, I don't recall growing up with the fear of having this power generation in our community.
I raised my kids here. We're 5 miles away from the nuclear power plant.
So that's my own personal experience.
That does not negate anybody else's experience in the community.
I hope that other community members can find answers to some of the thyroid cancer cases that have been brought up tonight.
I can also say that I appreciate the NRC.
They came to our office as part of their environmental analysis, and some of their scoping questions were very thoughtful.
We had a really robust conversation about Covert Township, our community, socioeconomic status, accessibility to utilities, public health, you name
122 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com it. It was a great conversation.
I appreciate the NRC, the DOE, and Holtec opening up those lines of communication, making me feel like I am being heard, and that our answers, that our questions are being answered.
I can also tell you that I have been throughout the community, and the greater region, and run into multiple families who are so happy that they have family members, sons, daughters, fathers, who have reliable jobs and are hopeful for the future.
Thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: Thank you.
Let's go ahead and go to Kate Hosier, then to Jonathan Current, and third to Ross Stein.
MS. HOSIER: Thank you.
My name is Kate Hosier, and I serve as the City Manager for the City of South Haven. The South Haven city council unanimously adopted a resolution of support for the reopening of the Palisades Nuclear Power Plant.
That resolution was adopted for a number of reasons. The council recognized the need for clean, base load energy generation, and noted the significant economic impacts the power plant has had in our community.
123 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com The economic impacts include the wages of a skilled and talented workforce, and the tax base that supports schools and public services.
Importantly, these plant employees are real people in our community. They've raised their kids in South Haven. They've volunteered and donated to local non-profits,
- churches, and service organizations. They've shopped in small businesses while they've called South Haven home.
Additionally, the previous owners of the plant have been active partners in the community, and we expect the same from Holtec.
And finally, as a fellow public employee, I know that there will be a committed, there will be committed public servants from the NRC and DOE going through a rigorous, practical process for the reopening of the plant in a safe and effective way.
Thank you for the NRC team and the DOE for being here and spending the appropriate time, energy and effort on this important project for our community.
Thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: Thank you.
Again, like to go to Jonathan Current, second to Ross Stein, and third to Kevin Kamps.
124 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com MR. CURRENT: Good evening. I'd just like to thank the Commission for their time and effort, in this matter.
My name's Jonathan Current. I live in Vicksburg, Michigan. I grew up in Watervliet, and I also represent Electrical Workers Local 131.
Our members work in Palisades Nuclear Plant, and they go to work there every day expecting a safe working environment. And they get that safe working environment.
They know first-hand that nuclear power is highly regulated, and it's highly regulated for good reason, and they feel safe there.
They are also excited to expand this plant. If there's one thing that IBEW electricians know, it's craftsmanship, it's professionalism, it's integrity.
We expect the Commission to act with that same integrity and consider all the public comments.
That understanding of craftsmanship is also the reason that we would like to see that project labor agreements and maintenance agreements are maintained throughout the construction of this plant, and throughout the maintenance of the plant throughout its life.
125 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com I will say that if there is one thing that we know about nuclear power, it's that it has been safe throughout its existence in the United States.
There is a great deal that we expect in the nuclear industry, and we have always helped to maintain that.
And so, I really do think that this project going forward is going to be essential. It's going to be a bellwether for how we solve this climate crisis, how we solve green energy, and understanding that we are not going to be able to build battery plants.
We are not going to be able to build chip factories. We're not going to be able to have data centers and have these, and electric vehicles without reliable energy.
And, reliable energy is going to need a diverse set of power sources, and nuclear energy should be a key part of that.
And so going into the future, that's what we should aspire to. To aspire to do things and to do it the right way, through professionalism.
And I believe that all of you up there are going to do that. I have faith in you just like I have faith in our electricians, and the engineers that
126 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com are going to design this plant.
We're going to do it right. We're going to look at all the facets. We're going to clean up all of the things that people are concerned about, and we're going to do it right. And, we're going to move forward.
So, thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay, let's go to Ross Stein.
Next to Kevin Kamps, and third to Jon Brennaman.
MR. STEIN: Good evening, I'm Ross Stein and the Supervisor of South Haven Charter Township.
We're the municipality just north of Covert.
Passed a resolution in support of the Palisades Plant opening. I won't bore you with the same details that all the other governmental leaders have already given you, but we're excited to hopefully have this plant open again for all the reasons that they stated.
We have confidence that Nuclear Regulatory will do their job and get the safe opening of the plant.
And, thank you for being here, and I personally come from a fifth generation fruit farmer that lives in the area.
So, I've spent my whole life here. I've
127 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com been here longer than the Palisades Plant, so I'm confident that you will do what's necessary and keep it going.
Thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay, thank you.
Let's go to Kevin Kamps. Kevin Kamps, are you with us?
MR. KAMPS: Thank you, Kevin Kamps with Beyond Nuclear.
We request 180 days for a public comment period. Thirty days is not sufficient. This is unprecedented, very high risk, insanely expensive for the public. And Holtec's rush to restart is no excuse for a short 30-day public comment period.
To piggyback on something that Wally Taylor said earlier, in terms of a Palisades specific SEIS, I think that a programmatic or even generic EIS is called for.
Because you now have a parade of zombie reactors in this country. Palisades set the precedent, followed by Duane Arnold in Iowa, Three Mile Island Unit 1, and we wait to hear who else will join this parade of zombie reactors.
So, some of the safety problems with Palisades have been mentioned, and I would just like
128 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com to agree with someone on the panel who said there are overlaps between safety and environmental impact.
Craig Schultz pointed out that a
Fukushima-scale catastrophe or a Chernobyl-scale catastrophe at Palisades would certainly have environmental impacts.
So, the extremely large negative environmental impacts of a meltdown at the Palisades zombie reactor, would include large-scale airborne
- fallout, and waterborne outflow of hazardous radioactivity into Lake Michigan, as well as wind driven precipitation delivered fallout onto land.
Such airborne fallout from Chernobyl in 1986 severely contaminated not just the breadbasket of Europe, also known as Ukraine, but also sheep farms in Scotland, Sami reindeer herding grounds in the Scandinavian Arctic, Lake Constance, which borders Bavaria, Germany, and elsewhere.
Not just hundreds, but even thousands of miles downwind.
Radioactive fallout and wastewater discharges into the Pacific Ocean from Fukushima Daiichi in Japan, did not end in the spring of 2011, they began then.
The tritiated wastewater discharges will
129 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com now continue for decades intentionally, despite the risks to humans via Pacific fisheries.
These are cautionary tales for Van Buren, as well as Berrien, Allegan, and Kalamazoo Counties, a major agricultural breadbasket of Michigan.
Not to mention a tourism and recreation Mecca for the Great Lakes state.
The late, great Maynard Coffman, a Bangor farmer and author, the founding father of the Michigan Organic Food and Farm Alliance, and a watchdog on Palisades since before ground was even broken in 1967, warned repeatedly about these impacts on Palisades area agriculture, for decades on end.
And as an expert witness for the Environmental Coalition opposed to Palisades restart, Arnie Gunderson, chief engineer at Fairwinds, warned a decade ago, a Fukushima-scale radioactive disaster at Palisades would be catastrophic for Lake Michigan, and the rest of the Great Lakes downstream, and downwind.
The Great Lakes comprise 21 percent of the world's surface fresh water. Eighty-four percent of North America's and 95 percent of the USA's.
The Great Lakes serve as drinking water for more than 40 million people in eight U.S. states, two Canadian provinces, and a large number of
130 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com indigenous nations.
To put this all at risk with the unneeded Palisades zombie reactor restart, is nuclear madness.
The hazardous persistence of artificial radioactive pollutants that would escape into the environment due to reactor core meltdown, are nightmarish.
Tritium, radioactive hydrogen, which can go anywhere in the human anatomy right down to the DNA molecule, 123 to 246 years of hazard.
Cesium-137, a muscle seeker, around 300-600 years of hazard.
Strontium-90, a bone seeker, around 300-600 years of hazard.
Carbon-14, which can also go anywhere in the human body right down to the DNA molecule, 55,000 to 110,000 years of hazard.
Plutonium-239, 240,000 to 480,000 years of hazard.
Iodine-129, 157 to 314 million years of hazard.
To name but a small number of the more than 200 hazardous artificial radioactive isotopes contained in the irradiated nuclear fuel at Palisades, as well as in its operating reactor core.
131 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com Thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay, the last speaker that I have signed up to speak at this point at least in the room, is John Brennaman.
MR. BRENNAMAN: Hello, thank you.
The last meeting I was at, it seemed like the NRC had already made the decision. It seemed like they're going to start the Palisades Nuclear Power Plant.
And this meeting is just seems like you're checking a box, one last thing before we start it.
And, I would like to protest. I think you people know everything I know about the degraded reactor vessel.
You know everything I know about the lid and the pumps, and all that. And, it feels to me like money and politics is making this decision, and I protest.
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay.
Let's go ahead Marlayna, if you want to take the hands that we have online, and then if folks would like another chance here in the room at the microphone once we have gone through.
I think we have four hands at this point, then we'll go ahead and offer another chance at the
132 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com microphone here in the room.
So, Marlayna?
MS. DOELL: Okay, sounds good.
We did have one additional hand come up during that, so we have five hands right now. So I'll work through those and then we can do a last call.
Next in the cue is who I believe is Michael Keegan at extension 1441. Michael, I believe that's you.
I'm going to give you the ability to unmute your microphone and again since you're calling in, you may have to press *6. But you should be able to do that now.
And then Jan Boudart, it will be to you next.
MR. KEEGAN: Hello?
MS. DOELL: Hey, Michael.
MR. KEEGAN: Hello, I'm Michael Keegan, I'm with Don't Waste Michigan.
Don't Waste Michigan has a long history with Palisades. In 1993-1994, the Attorney General of the State of Michigan joined us in representing Don't Waste Michigan in federal court regarding the loading of the dry casks.
We were promised, they promised the court
133 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com that they could always unload them. And, we were remanded back to the agency.
Lo and behold, a year and a half later we learned that no, they can't be unloaded. They've never been unloaded anywhere in the industry.
Cask Number 4 remains faulty with cracks and welding problems and was never unloaded but was supposed to have been. And it's still here, faulty.
I've been asked to read a brief statement from Joseph J. Mangano, Masters of Public Health, Masters of Business Administration, epidemiologist and Executive Director of Radiation and Public Health Project. These are his comments.
Comments for public hearing on proposed restart of Palisades Nuclear Reactor, July 11, 2024.
Discussion on the proposed restart of the Palisades reactor has focused largely on needed maintenance of its old and corroded mechanical parts, an enormous cost of this upkeep.
Ignored is the most important issue, whether bringing Palisades back to life presents a health hazard to people living nearby.
Historical data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, provide the answer.
In Van Buren County, the rate of cancer deaths was 8
134 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com percent below the U.S. in a period just before the reactor started up.
But in the past two decades, the county rate was 14 percent above the U.S. Thus, in the Palisades era, Van Buren has shifted from a low cancer to a high cancer county.
If the county rate had remained 8 percent below the U.S., about 1,000 fewer Van Buren residents would have died of cancer since the late 1970s.
Among children, teenagers, and young adults, the county's cancer death rate shifted from 38 percent below, to 50 percent above the U.S.
The dose of radiation is known to be the most damaging to young humans.
Each of these cancer victims had been exposed to radioactive chemicals, routinely released from Palisades into local air and water.
Cancer is a terrible menace for our society. Almost half of all Americans will be diagnosed sometime in their lives.
Every case is a tragedy. An agonizing ordeal for the persons, and their friends, and their family, regardless of whether it is successfully treated or not.
Our leaders must ensure that any and all
135 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com steps be taken to prevent cancer. Closing Palisades was one such action that would result in fewer people suffering from cancer in the future.
Safe sources of electricity such as solar and wind, are now growing rapidly. Palisades is not needed, and should remain permanently closed.
Signed, Joseph Mangano.
Now, in light of what has --
(Simultaneous speaking.)
MS. DOELL: Mr. Keegan, we're just over 3 minutes for your comments if you'd be able to wrap up in the next 10 or 15 seconds.
MR. KEEGAN: I can do that. And just hearing of the thyroid cancers and illnesses at Palisades Park.
What I am asking for is a baseline study, community study, that is funded and independent to look at the cancers around Palisades.
Also, independent monitoring of rad alert systems so that the community can have early warnings and know what's going on there.
Thank you.
MS. DOELL: All right, thank you for your comments.
Next in the cue, we have Jan Boudart.
136 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com Jan, I'm going to give you the ability to unmute your microphone. If you'd like to come off of mute and make your comments, please feel free to do so.
MS. BOUDART: Hi, I am Jan Boudart, the Secretary of the Nuclear Energy Information Service in Chicago. I'm here with Stephanie Bilenko and Dave Kraft, who have spoken.
I want to talk about big numbers, because we've been talking about the big numbers. The amount of taxes that are going to the state of Michigan, and Van Buren County.
The number of jobs, and how many people are going to be making good livings working in the plant.
And so, I also heard that this nuclear plant, these nuclear plants are the hallmark of America, which I thought was quite fulsome as a statement.
So, when we're talking about these big numbers and the large amounts of money involved, I would like to talk about those things that cannot be calculated. And, use our imaginations to figure out how much thing are really, really going to cost.
The first thing is pricing out the cost of renewable energy versus the cost of nuclear energy.
137 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com And, I think that if this were priced out, and we were to compare the number of good jobs that make a living in renewable energy versus the number that could make a living in nuclear energy, we would find that the number of jobs in renewables is not only greater, the jobs are safer. Not completely safe, that I do understand.
But the jobs are safer and anyway, the next thing I would like to see priced out is the cost of the loss of tourism.
Tourist families go down through generations. There are many, many jobs in the future for tourism among this absolutely stellar, spectacular part of Michigan.
And, we don't count the number of tourism jobs that could be lost if the radiation levels go up in Van Buren County.
And then, we're not pricing out the medical cost. There is a huge medical cost now for cancers, and I don't think we should stop at cancers.
Many, many other kinds of health problems are caused by nuclear radiation. But this goes down through generations.
We're not pricing out how much it's going to cost our grandchildren and our great-grandchildren,
138 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com to treat their cancers.
And we're not going to be pricing out how much it's going to cost for birth defects in the future. These are costs that we cannot calculate.
Another thing that we're not pricing out is the cost of the nuclear waste, because we can't price out the cost of the zillions and I'm sorry for using that silly word, miles of transportation of nuclear waste from here to there.
And moving it to, from one place to another, and the plans to move it to New Mexico, and from there to move it to a deep geologic repository.
These are costs that should be priced out.
And also, the indigenous people of the United States. The Anishinabek, I never get that right, and the Iroquois in 2017 made a statement.
What to do with spent fuel.
And, I bring this up --
(Simultaneous speaking.)
MS. DOELL: You're coming up on your 3 minutes if you wouldn't mind --
MS. BOUDART: I know, I know.
MS. DOELL: -- being able to wrap up your comments.
MS. BOUDART: I bring this up at most
139 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com meetings.
We never price out their ideas. We say oh look, we're paying attention to the indigenous people.
We're listening to them.
But we don't price out their ideas, which means we're really not listening to them.
Another thing is the amount of carbon that is put into the air while we're waiting for nuclear plants to get started, is a factor that we need to pay attention to.
And, I'm sorry but this is really important. People who say nobody died at TMI never saw the movie Radiation: The Women of Three Mile Island.
And now there's a movie, SOS, about San Onofre, and there is a new movie, Atomic Africa, which is very, very expressive about the cost of uranium mining to the uranium miners.
Not to the owners. Not the capitalists, but the people who go down in the mines and do the work.
And in the area that the movie, Atomic Africa treats, there were six cases of extreme birth defects when there had never been any birth defects in that community. Not no birth defects, because that's
140 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com not possible.
But it was like 6:1 from the time that they started mining uranium.
These costs are not priced out. We cannot calculate this enormous cost.
I'm done.
MS. DOELL: Thank you, Ms. Boudart.
All right, the last three folks that we have online are Philip Holt, Tanya Cabala, and then a dial in caller with the last four digits 7056.
Philip, I'm going to give you the ability to come off of mute and make your comments. You should be able to do that now. Please introduce yourself and feel free.
MR. HOLT: Thank you very much.
My name is Philip Holt, I work with Generation Atomic, we're a non-profit volunteer group that have a case for the use of nuclear power to address this century's challenges of climate change, and carbon emissions.
And, I just want to thank the NRC, the DOE, all the stakeholders that are here, and everyone who has shared their comments with the group, and for the consideration in this environmental assessment.
I call in both as part Gen A and also as a
141 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com property owner in Michigan, whose family has enjoyed lakefront cabin summers there for many, many years.
So, I know there's been a lot of talk about the potential risks and theoretical cancers, and the possibility of accidents that may be associated with nuclear power.
What I do know, and where I encourage the NRC in its evaluation of its environmental assessment to consider, is the known facts.
And those known facts are that when the Palisades Nuclear Power Plant shut down, global carbon emissions increased in relation to the plant shutting down, as those sources were immediately replaced by carbon-based fuels.
And when the Palisades Plant comes back online, the global carbon emissions will go down proportionally.
I think it's important when we look at environmental assessments and environmental impact statements, it's all too common to look at the negatives and the challenges of what will this project do bad for the environment.
And, we have a situation here where almost unexpectedly, the reactivation of the Palisades Nuclear Power Plant can in fact, and will in fact,
142 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com have a positive net benefit on the environment.
And, I strongly urge the NRC to consider that often neglected but in this case real possibility, that restarting the Palisades Nuclear Power Plant will in fact, be an increase and benefit to the environment.
Thank you for your time.
MS. DOELL: Okay, thank you very much for your comments.
Next in the cue is Tanya Cabala. Tanya, I should be giving you the ability to unmute your microphone. If you would like to come off of mute and make your comments, please feel free.
MS. CABALA: (No audible response.)
MS. DOELL: Oh, Tanya, I see you have come off of mute but we cannot hear you.
MS. CABALA: Sure.
MS. DOELL: Oh, there you are.
MS. CABALA: Can you hear me?
MS. DOELL: Yes, there it is.
MS. CABALA: Sure, hi, my name is Tanya Cabala. I was involved years ago directly with issues related to Palisades, and also Big Rock Point in Charlevoix, in my capacity as an environmental non-profit director.
143 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com I'm speaking on behalf of myself tonight, and not an organization.
I live in White Hall, in northern Muskegon County. I wish to express my profound concern regarding the proposed restart of the Palisades Nuclear Power Plant.
Particularly in the light of an absence of a solution to the waste the plant will create. The plants that all our country's nuclear plants create.
This issue is of paramount importance as it directly impacts public safety, environmental health, and the long-term sustainability of our community, and state.
The lack of a
permanent national repository for high-level radioactive waste presents a significant and seeming insurmountable challenge.
It was 73 years ago that commercial nuclear power plant began to operate. And, a repository was promised for these dangerous waste beginning to be created. Today, there is still no answers to the waste.
Unbelievably, we continue to allow the creation of a waste that we don't know what to do with except for we stockpile them onsite.
Or later down the road we plan
144 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com transporting them through communities by rail, by water, I even heard by barge to Muskegon's harbor, to a repository forced on a sacrificial state.
Currently, Palisades houses approximately 630 tons of spent fuel waste in the country, and 30, excuse me, in 21 concrete casks. And, a restart will only increase this dangerous inventory.
The waste remain[s]
hazardous for thousands of years, far exceeding the life span of any containment measures we can currently guarantee.
This is irresponsible and poses a
continual risk to
- future, current and future generations.
Here we are using energy again and not dealing with the results.
My community, the White Lake area, and northern Muskegon County has learned well the sad promise of jobs, jobs, jobs, but accompanied by pollution.
I have worked much of my adult life helping our community to heal, our lake to heal, starting when I had young children, and ending when I had grandchildren.
Even so, the groundwater pollution at one site will remain hazardous for thousands of years.
145 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com So, I would encourage people to think long and hard, and look past the short-term promise of jobs.
Palisades might provide short-term employment, but they have to be weighed against the long-term risks and costs.
The benefits are temporary, I can promise you that. All of the companies that provided jobs are now closed, but we live with the legacy.
So, the dangers associated with nuclear waste endure indefinitely.
The Palisades facility is over 50 years old, and with age comes an increased risk of catastrophic failure.
Even though the potential for an accident is statistically low generally, the potential at such an aged facility is concerning.
Regardless, if it happened, we wouldn't be quibbling about the low probability because it would be devastating not only to those in the immediate vicinity, but to the wider region.
Holtec, the current owner of the plant, has a controversial track record and there are substantial concerns about the company's ability to safely manage the plant, and the associated waste.
146 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com So in conclusion, the restart of this plant poses significant and long-lasting risks that far outweigh the short-term benefits.
I urge the NRC to prioritize the safety and well-being of the public and the environment, by reconsidering the restart of this aging facility.
Thank you very much for considering my comments.
MS. DOELL: Thank you, Ms. Cabala.
The final person in the cue online is a phone-in caller with last four digits, 7056. I'm going to give you the ability to unmute your microphone.
You may have to press *6 on your phone to do so, but it should now be open if you'd like to make your comments.
MR. CAMPBELL: Hello?
MS. DOELL: Oh, we can hear you. Please --
(Simultaneous speaking.)
MR. CAMPBELL: Can you hear me now?
MS. DOELL: Yes, I can, and please do, introduce yourself for the record.
MR. CAMPBELL: Okay.
Hi, my name is Bruce Campbell, sorry, I didn't get that *6 together for a while.
147 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com So, this never done before proposal to restart Palisades plus using the very disreputable company Holtec, requires a full EIS, not just an EA, and we could use 180-day comment period.
One speaker mentioned the high power costs in California. Well, as a Californian, I am well aware that the high electricity costs impacting customers of investor owned utilities in California, or the Diablo Canyon as well as the now shutdown San Onofre nuclear power facilities.
Also, the suppression of rooftop solar in recent years hasn't helped.
One question got a response that reactor accident consequences will be assessed in the EA, or preferably in the EIS.
Please make sure that various intensities of nuclear accidents are considered in this assessment.
Sandia Labs came out with a reactor accident consequences study late in 1982, however, the worst case reactor accident consequences information was suppressed until Ed Markey still in, now in the Senate, raised hell and finally got them to release the worst case reactor accident data they had.
So, don't suppress that worst case data in
148 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com that assessment.
There are a lot of bait and switches related to the nuclear industry. They promise thick transportable casks, but we got thin canisters instead once the industry moved into high burn up fuel in the year 2000.
Look at the shiny object of nuclear fusion they're dazzling people with these days, while they're just, they're dazzling people with fusion while they're getting their rubberstamp together to rubberstamp getting those creaky old giant nuclear reactors going again.
And getting that new generation of nuclear reactors going. Those, the small modular reactors, I understand there's been one model approved and now that one admittedly doesn't work.
The Idaho town that was going to host one has backed out.
Bill Gates was given $2 billion by the government, I think he could afford it himself if he wanted if he thought his Wyoming nuclear project was so good.
And also, we don't have time. These old creekers aren't trustworthy. And these SMRs. Anyway, the SMRs would be lucky to get going by 2030 or 2033.
149 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com Plus I hear they create more radwaste per unit of electricity produced, than do larger reactors.
So, I commented on Holtec's so-called decommissioning clean-up plan for Indian Point on the Hudson River a few years back.
Scandalously, they planned to go only, they planned to go no deeper than 4 feet in their clean up, this despite realizing that there's a radioactive aquifer beneath the facility, which is connected to the Hudson River system.
But instead, they'd rather pocket the juicy decommissioning funds and do a half-assed study, and maybe site something else there. Anyway, they're a bad company.
Also, they have their fingers in so many pies that there should be anti-trust investigation into Holtec.
And, this recent craze push for nuclear is due to big tech pressuring to power their AI, as well as a frenzy among confused investors.
And also, speaking of carbon footprints, the main part of the nuclear industry carbon footprint is in uranium enrichment.
Or some good things in bringing some industry home. However, bringing the nuclear industry
150 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com home will poison indigenous people.
And the Center for Uranium Enrichment will be that one commercial uranium enrichment facility in southeast New Mexico, to my knowledge.
Also where Whip is, and where Holtec wants their so-called consolidated interim dump, which will likely become permanent.
And then, I saw this map in the San Onofre film someone mentioned, a documentary. I saw this, the map of the Ogallala Aquifer.
And the southeastern end of that not only goes through the Permian Basin, which is sure dumb, but then it goes into the place where the two companies want their so-called consolidated interim dump sites, and about to where the Whip is.
Anyway, so --
(Simultaneous speaking.)
MS. DOELL: Mr. Campbell, yes, we've reached 3 minutes if you could wrap up your comments.
MR. CAMPBELL: So anyway, let's please go for the full EIS and don't suppress worst case reactor accident consequences.
Thank you.
MS. DOELL: All right.
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay.
151 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com I want to be very cognizant of time, as we do have a time that we need to be all broken out and leave the facility.
So, I'll just give a quick reminder that this is not the only way that you can provide your comments.
You can email your comments to palisadesrestartenvironmental@nrc.gov. You can go to regulations.gov and search for docket ID NRC-2024-0076.
You can mail comments to the Office of Administration at the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 20555.
And all that information and more is on slide 13 of the slides for this evening's meeting.
I do want to just give another chance if folks want another couple minutes at the microphone.
If you've spoken already and you're in the room and you'd like a couple more minutes, let me know.
We can do that as we do have a little more time but again, I want to make sure that we're able to clean up and get out of here before they kick us out.
Anyone want a little more time at the microphone?
Okay, couple more minutes, sir? And if
152 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com you could introduce yourself.
MR. KAMPS: Hello again, Kevin Kamps with Beyond Nuclear. So, I did want to talk about the jobs that were mentioned a number of times tonight.
I've been trying to follow the bailouts proposed requested to Holtec. $300 million from the state has been approved, unfortunately.
Another $1.5 billion in loans by DOE on March 27. So that's $1.8 billion thus far.
But it's the tip of the iceberg. The figure that I have but it's not all encompassing because the subsidies continue. Some of them are general in nature for the whole country, but Holtec will benefit.
But specifically to Palisades, I have added up $8.3 billion. $8 billion $300 million dollars in requested bailouts related to the restart.
And another additional $7.4 billion requested from the Department of Energy in nuclear loan guarantees, for the construction and operation, as well as the design certification of these two SMRs at Palisades itself. And perhaps more at Big Rock Point.
But since tonight is about an environmental assessment, it should be an EIS on the
153 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com Palisades restart of the old reactor.
The company has admitted that only 280 jobs will be restored by this restart. So you divide
$8.3 billion by 280 restored jobs and you're pushing
$30 million per restored job. This is of course, absurd.
So, opportunity costs have been mentioned tonight. In the state of Michigan last year, state subsidized job creation averaged $29,000.00 per new job created.
That makes this proposal for the restart in terms of job creation, 1,000 times more expensive than the state average.
So, in your environmental review for the restart, I would urge you to look at what other societal benefits could be purchased for $8.3 billion.
Even just in the energy sector.
So of course, our preferred alternative, no restart. So, the no action alternative. And in terms of alternative sources of electrical generation, that would be renewables like wind and solar combined with efficiency and storage.
That is our preferred alternative.
Thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: All right, anyone else
154 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com wanting a few more minutes at the microphone this evening before we close?
MS. DOELL: And Lance, we do have one more hand up online while you're collecting folks there in the room, if that's all right.
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay, go ahead and take them, Marlayna.
MS. DOELL: All right, sounds good.
I believe it is Michael Keegan again. I am going to open up your microphone. You should have the ability to make any additional comments.
MR. KEEGAN: (No audible response.)
MS. DOELL: Oh, Michael I see that you came off mute but I'm not hearing you.
MR. KEEGAN: (No audible response.)
MS. DOELL: Oh, I believe we have lost Michael. But Jacqueline Drechsler has just put her hand up so while we're waiting to see if Michael comes back, Jacqueline, I'm going to go ahead and give you the ability to unmute your microphone. You should be able to do so.
MS. DRECHSLER: Thank you so much for this extra opportunity to speak.
I would just like to say that something that I didn't manage to get in before is that this
155 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com company Holtec, is actually notorious for raiding decommissioning trust funds as well.
Using money from the decommissioning trust funds to show how much they are good neighbors, by paying for things that decommissioning trust funds are not supposed to be used for.
And so, I just want everyone to be aware of they're doing this at Indian Point. They're doing it at the Pilgrim Plant in Massachusetts.
They have done it at the Oyster Bay Plant in Camden, New Jersey.
They have a repeated pattern of very bad behaviors, and I really do feel that the NRC needs to be looking at repeated patterns.
But the other thing that I'd like to say is they've exposed people. There is a person at the Pilgrim Plant who can't work there anymore because he was so exposed to radiation that the beepers go off whenever he walks in.
So, there's a lot of safety issues inherent in the Palisades Plant to begin with, but also inherent in Holtec and their decommissioning methods. Let alone the fact that they've never operated a plant.
So, I just wanted to bring that up.
156 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com Thank you very much.
MS. DOELL: Okay, thank you very much.
And Mr. Keegan, I see that your mic is still open but we are not hearing you, so I'm going to return it to the folks in the room and if you're able to reconnect here, please just let me know.
I'm going to leave your mic open in case, but yes, I think we're having a technical difficulty.
I apologize for that.
So Lance, back over to you.
MR. RAKOVAN: I think at this point, we're going to go ahead and move to close. So, I'll ask Dan if he wants to give any closing remarks?
MR. BARNHURST: I would, thank you, Lance.
I just, the hour feels kind of late and I know that we've lost some people along the way, but so I guess a big high five to those of you that are still here.
I want you to know that we appreciate your comments. This is an important part of, this is a very important part of our, the beginning of our environmental review.
The comments that you have left tonight verbally, hopefully comments that you will leave through regulations.gov, or through the email address
157 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com that's provided I
believe is palisadesrestartenvironmental@nrc.gov, are comments will absolutely be considered in the review.
And so, we do appreciate that and again, encourage you to take advantage of the time you have to begin.
And remind you that there will be another opportunity whenever the draft environmental assessment is issued, to review that and to make your voice heard.
So, I guess in closing, once again thank you and I want to thank those that helped make this possible tonight at Lake Michigan College. This is a wonderful facility and we appreciate it.
And with that, I'll say thanks.
(Whereupon, the above-entitled matter went off the record at 9:21 p.m.)