ML24284A010
| ML24284A010 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Perry  |
| Issue date: | 10/22/2024 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NRC-0042 | |
| Download: ML24284A010 (1) | |
Text
Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Title:
Public Meeting to Receive Comments on the Draft Perry Plant Environmental Impact Statement Location:
teleconference Date:
10-02-24 Work Order No.:
NRC-0042 Pages 1-47 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
+ + + + +
PUBLIC MEETING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT PERRY PLANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
+ + + + +
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 2, 2024
+ + + + +
The meeting was convened via Videoconference, at 6:00 p.m. EDT, Lance Rakovan, Facilitator, presiding.
PRESENT:
LANCE RAKOVAN, Facilitator, NMSS VIKTORIA MITLYNG, OPA JOHN MOSES, NMSS VAUGHN THOMAS, NRR CAROLYN WOLF, OCA ALSO PRESENT:
DIANE D'ARRIGO JACKIE DREXLER DARYL GALE CONNIE KLINE MADISON SCHRODER
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 P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 6:00 p.m.
MR. RAKOVAN: Ive got 6:00 o'clock, so let's go ahead and get started. I want to go through the information that's kind of on this introductory slide before we dive into the main presentation. For those of you who don't me, my name is Lance Rakovan.
I am the environmental project manager for Perry Plant License Renewal.
If you have any technical issues during this meeting, please reach out to Angela Sabet.
Angela is assisting me with this evening's meeting, and she can be reached at Angela.Sabet@nrc.gov. You can find information in this meeting, including a link to the slides, on our public meeting schedule at nrc.gov. You can also use this link here or look at the public meeting schedule, and you'll find today's meeting at 6 o'clock.
The unique identifier for the meeting is 20241114. And we also have the ADAMS accession number, if you're familiar with our electronic filing system. You can find the slides there also using the accession number ML24256A167.
So having said that, let's go ahead and
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 jump into our main presentation. Again, as I said, my name is Lance Rakovan, and it's my pleasure to welcome you to today's public meeting hosted by the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or NRC, involving Perry Nuclear Power Plant license renewal.
Our goals today are to, one, provide you with an overview of the NRC's preliminary findings in our Perry Plant license renewal draft Environmental Impact Statement, or EIS, and, two, to solicit your comments on the draft EIS.
Moving to Slide 2, here's our agenda for today. After some introductions, opening remarks, and a little bit about the purpose, as I'm going through now, we'll move on to a brief presentation involving our processes and the preliminary findings of the draft EIS.
We'll take some time to see if anyone has any clarifying questions on the presentation, and after that comes the final and most important part of our webinar which is where we will open the virtual floor to receive your comments on the draft EIS.
For those of you on the phone, I'm moving to Slide 3.
This is a comment gathering meeting by NRC's definition which means our primary purpose here
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 today is to listen to you, specifically to collect your comments on the draft Perry Plant license renewal environmental impact statement.
So again, we appreciate your patience in terms of listening to the presentation, but we want to make sure that everyone who is joining us today has at least a basic understanding of the EIS, our preliminary findings, as well as our processes.
Please note that we are recording and transcribing today's meeting so the NRC can get a full accounting of the comments that you provide.
Participants will be in listen only mode until we get to the comment portion of the meeting or when we ask to see if there's any clarifying questions on our presentation. And I'd like to stress that no regulatory decisions will be made during today's meeting.
Moving on to Slide 4, with us today on the line are numerous NRC staff, including Vaughn Thomas, who is the safety lead for Perry Plant license renewal, again myself, Lance Rakovan. Steve Koenick was not able to join us this evening, but we do have John Moses who is the deputy director of the Division of Rulemaking, Environmental, and Financial Support in
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 our office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
So, John, if you're ready, if you'd like to provide some opening remarks?
Thanks, Lance. Good evening, everyone.
Let me just clean up my background a little bit, okay.
Thank you for joining this evening's session to discuss the draft Environmental Impact Statement, or DEIS, for the Perry Plant license renewal application.
And the purpose of today's meeting, as Lance has said, is to inform you about the results of our review and to seek your input on the draft Environmental Impact Statement. This is the second of two meetings that we're convening on this for your public input.
The NRC's process encourages public participation and transparency. As you may know, public participation, openness and, excuse me, public transparency and openness are key to NRC's activities, including the licensing of nuclear facilities.
After Lance describes the results of today's meeting, or today's Environmental Impact Statement, we'll solicit your comments on the draft.
Our goal is to hear from you and collect any comments that you might have that we may fully consider them
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 during the process when we finalize the Environmental Impact Statement.
And for your awareness and information, the public comment period is open for, correct me if I'm wrong, Lance, 45 days which concludes on October 21st.
MR. RAKOVAN: Correct.
MR. MOSES: Thank you. Next slide, please. Great, thank you.
Before we go into today's presentation, I just want to take a few moments to introduce you the NRC. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulates commercial nuclear power plants, research and test and training reactors, nuclear fuel cycle facilities, and the use of radioactive materials in medical, academic, and industrial settings.
The NRC was created by the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 which separated the former Atomic Energy Commission into a regulatory body, the NRC, and a research and promotional body which is the Department of Energy.
If you like, you can scan the QR code on the screen to access the NRC's current strategic plan.
If you have some free time, I encourage you to take a
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 look. The plan's three strategic goals are to, one, ensure the safe and secure use of radioactive materials, continue to foster a healthy organization, and three, inspire stakeholder confidence in the Agency.
For the third
- goal, stakeholder confidence, we use meetings like this one to involve you in the process. We learned during the pandemic that webinars or virtual meetings make work accessible to broad audience. As we continue learning about our processes and, kind of, as a learning organization, learning from every time we do this, we'd appreciate your feedback on how this meeting worked for you.
I look forward to hearing your insights and feedback on the Perry Plant draft EIS. Thank you for your participation. And with that, I'll turn it back to Lance.
MR. RAKOVAN: Thanks, John. So we're on Slide 6 now for anyone following on the phone. Here's some background information on the Perry Plant licensing history. So Perry Plant Unit 1 was first licensed in November of 1986. The current renewed license expires in November of 2026. If the license renewal is granted, we're looking at a 20-year period
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 of relicensing for the plant.
Slide 7. In terms of our environmental reviews, the NRC has a generic environmental impact statement, or GEIS, for license renewal which addresses environmental issues that are common to all plants or a distinct sub-set of plants. These are referred to as Category 1 issues.
For this Environmental Impact Statement, the NRC relied on the license renewal GEIS and sought to identify any new and significant information on Category 1 issues but did not find any. Additionally, the NRC staff completed site or plant-specific evaluations for Category 2 or non-generic issues.
Next slide, please. This is just a graphic that shows some of the topics that we look at as part of our environmental review, including surface and ground water use and quality, radiation protection and postulated accidents, and air quality and meteorology.
Going to Slide 9. In general, the impacts are defined in our Environmental Impact Statement as small, moderate, or large. A small impact would be effects that are not detectable or so minor that they will neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any
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 important attribute of a particular resource.
Moderate effects are sufficient to noticeably alter but not destabilize important attributes of a resource.
And finally, large would be effects that are clearly noticeable and are sufficient to destabilize important attributes of a particular resource.
The majority of what you will find in the Environmental Impact Statement uses this rating system for the potential impacts on the environment of the continued operation of the plant.
Slide 10. So there's a number of special topics that don't follow that categorization of small, moderate, and large for defining impacts. So I'll go into a little bit of detail on those.
For federally licensed or federally listed, sorry, species in critical habitats, we mirror the language of the Endangered Species Act which, again, is similar in that there are three category definitions for impacts. But in this case, they are no effect, may effect, but it is not likely to adversely effect, or may effect and is likely to adversely effect. So again, three categories, fairly
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 similar to what we're using but slightly different language.
For essential fish habitat we use the language of the Magnuson Stevens Act which in this case has four categorical definitions for impacts: no adverse impacts, minimal adverse impacts, more than minimal but less than substantial adverse impacts, and substantial adverse impacts.
For Slide 11, a few more of these are, kind of special cases. The impacts on historical and cultural resources use the language of the National Historic Preservation Act to define impacts as either there would be no adverse effect, or there would be an adverse effect. An example of historic and cultural resources would be historic properties.
And then for environmental justice, those impacts use the language of Executive Order 12898 to make a determination whether said impacts, if any, have high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority populations and low income populations.
All right, so let's go ahead and jump into the preliminary findings, again as detailed in the Environmental Impact Statement. This slide shows a
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 list of resource areas where the impact was determined to be small. You can see these include things like air quality and noise, terrestrial and aquatic resources, socioeconomics, waste management, and so on.
So you'll see that for the most part we found that the impacts on the various resource areas, due to the 20 additional years of operation of Perry Plant, we would estimate as being small on the environment.
So to go back into some of those different categories that I went over a moment ago, for historic and cultural resources our preliminary finding is that license renewal would not adversely affect known historic properties.
For environmental justice, there are no disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental effects on minority and low income populations as a result of the proposed action.
For cumulative
- impacts, this one's slightly more complicated. So we don't necessarily just put a label on it. If you are interested in cumulative impacts, we suggest that you just go ahead and go to that section, Section 4.13 of the draft EIS,
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 and look at the details there.
Slide 14. So a few more of the special categories, for special status species and habitats we have a preliminary finding that the proposed action may affect, but it is not likely to adversely affect the list of animals here, so that includes a few bats and the monarch butterfly. And no effect is seen on designated critical habitats, or essential fish habitats, or national marine sanctuaries present.
So in terms of alternatives to the proposed action, which again is allowing the plant to operate for an additional 20 years, no new and significant information was identified regarding the following alternatives in which power replacement includes natural gas-fired combined cycle and renewables, natural gas combination.
And, of course, we always, in terms of all NEPA evaluations, have a no action alternative, essentially if the plant were to stop operation what the impact of that action would be in terms of energy production.
Slide 16, this brings us to our preliminary recommendation. The adverse environmental impacts of license renewal for Perry Plant, for an
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 additional 20 years beyond the current expiration date, are not so great that preserving the option of license renewal for energy planning decision makers would be unreasonable.
So let me say that in more simple terms, what we're trying to say here is that, from our analysis that the NRC staff performed, there is no environmental reason that energy planning decision makers should not allow the plant to operate for an additional 20 years. Given the impacts on the environment, we don't see it great enough that we would say, hey, you need to close the plant down or you shouldn't consider keeping it open.
Keep in mind that the NRC does not make this decision. We can only provide our analysis or recommendation, and it is up to others to make that decision. So if the plant continues to operate, we will regulate it, but it is not our call whether the plant continues to operate.
So here are some of our review milestones.
The draft EIS was published on August 30th. We had two Federal Register notices published on September 6th, one published by the Environmental Protection Agency, the EPA, and one by the NRC, kicking off our
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 45-day comment period.
We had our meeting yesterday and our meeting here today to collect comments, but this is just one way that you can provide your comments. And I'll go into detail about other ways that you can provide them momentarily, but we ask that you get your comments in by October 21st. That is a 45-day comment period from when those Federal Register notices were published back in September.
And again, our hope is that we will be able to get our final Environmental Impact Statement published in April of 2025.
So Slide 18, if you'd like to review a hard copy of the draft EIS, you can find one at the Perry Public Library. Just ask there at the front desk, and they'll point you in the right direction.
There are many ways that you can take a look at an electronic version. You can go to the Perry Plant Project Public website which you'll find a link here. And again, similar to the slides, as I said as I was starting the meeting out, if you're familiar with our ADAMS system you can find the draft EIS there using the accession number ML42, I'm sorry, 24241A256. I'll say that again, ML24241A256.
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 Slide 19, here's a little bit of additional information on Perry. The website listed here is where we try to put up links and other information in general about the work we're doing involving Perry Plant license renewal. You can also find general correspondence involving Perry Plant using this other link.
Slide 20, so tonight is certainly not the only way that you can provide your comments on the draft EIS. You can provide them by mail to our Office of Administration. That's at mail stop TWFN7A60M, that's U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555.
You can go to the
- website, Regulations.gov, and search for Docket ID NRC-2023-0136. You can send an email to an email account that we have set up specifically to receive comments such as this. And that is PerryEnvironmental, one word, PerryEnvironmental@nrc.gov.
Again, we ask that you submit your comments by October 21st. Any comments that we receive after that, we'll do our best to take into account as we're doing our work and finishing up on the final EIS. But to be sure that we take them into
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 account as part of that process, we ask that you get them in by October 21st.
What you'll see once the final EIS is issued is that it will contain an appendix where we provide at least a summary of the comments received during this period and provide a response to those comments. So again, try to get those in before October 21st if at all possible. All right, so that pretty well goes through the slides that I had prepared.
What I'd like to do now is open up the floor specifically to see if anyone has any clarifying questions about my presentation. Again, I just want to do a quick check to make sure that everybody understood the material that I covered before we open up the floor to comments.
If you do have or you would like to ask a question, if you're on MS Teams, you can use the raise my hand button and that will start a queue for me. If you are on the phone, please use -- sorry about that.
I'm not sure what that was. If you are on the phone, please press Star 5. You'll still need to un-mute, so on MS Teams you'll need to hit the microphone button.
On your phone, you'll either hit your un-mute button
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 or hit Star 6.
So I see we have Connie Kline. Connie, you should be able to un-mute.
MS. KLINE: I know we have to stop meeting like this, but today should be it. One question, and I've always kind of wondered about this statement that the NRC makes. I think I know the answer, but I just want to clarify to make sure.
When the NRC says that you only make recommendations, you know, as far as continuing operation of the plant or alternatives, when you say you only make recommendations but others are the actual decision and implementation entities, are you talking in that respect? Are you referring to now Vistra when it comes to continuing operation of the reactor? Is that what you mean?
MR. RAKOVAN: Certainly, that's one entity, if you will, that's involved in that. If Vistra decides to shut down the plant or to, you know, or to put it offline, that's up to them. But also there's a number of other, you know, say if the federal government were to decide that all nuclear power plants would shut down, and pass a law, or direct us to do that, then they would do that.
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 Right now, again, if it operates, we regulate it. So from our perspective, from at least an environmental perspective, we don't see a reason to prevent the plant from operating for an additional 20 years. But that decision is not in our hands, if that makes sense.
MS. KLINE: Okay, thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: Sure. All right, I have a number here that's 5837, Jackie, is that you, 5837 ending? I see you're unmuted.
MS. DREXLER Yes, hi, my name is Jackie Drexler, and I'm calling from Rockland Country, New York.
MR. RAKOVAN: Hi, Jackie.
MS. DREXLER: Hi, there. And who is this, because I'm on the land line. Because once again, I can't get onto your Microsoft Teams --
MR. RAKOVAN: This is Lance Rakovan again.
(Simultaneous speaking.)
MR. RAKOVAN: This is Lance Rakovan again, Jackie, that's how I recognized your number.
MS. DREXLER: Okay, thank you. So I don't know if this is the time for a comment, it seems like you're just asking for questions, and this isn't a
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 comment time, or is it?
MR. RAKOVAN: I was just asking for questions, but you're the only other hand that I have.
So if you want to provide your comment at this time, that's fine.
MS. DREXLER: Oh, okay. Then that would be really great. And do I get about three minutes or so?
MR. RAKOVAN: Yes, please, take three to five minutes, if you will. And again, like we usually do, if we have additional time, we'll move back around and give folks another chance at the microphone.
MS. DREXLER: Okay, so thank you very much for this opportunity. I was on the call in January, January 30th of this year on the Perry Plant license renewal with Judge Gibson. I don't really know about, you know, some of the contentions or decisions there.
But this is what I would like to say about this license extension request, renewal. I feel that this should be denied. This company that the Perry Plant, that is owned by Vistra Operations Company, LLC, of course, LLC, it's 60 years old. Really, you really want it go for another 20 years?
I saw something that said that even the
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 NRC itself had done sort of ranking of safe to non-safe reactors and that this plant was ranked at the far end of worse, so 102 out of 106 reactors. So I'm wondering why something that has had such a bad reputation would be considered for a license renewal, So I'd just like to talk about some of the risks. There's the risk for earthquakes, even as recently as this past August. Like Indian Point in New York, your plant over there, Perry, was built on a fault line. And I will tell you that if the people who were building Indian Point, you know, 50 years ago, knew that there was this major fault line going through it, it would not have been allowed to have been built. And we are very glad that it has been shut down.
We have the issue of shore erosion on the bluff area where the plant sits now, where your plant sits, the Perry Plant. And, you know, we have big issues. I don't know much it would have effect out there, but certainly here in the New York area we have big issues with erosion, and with storm surge, and lots of water issues. So I have a big concern about that.
I also have a really big concern about the
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 massive amounts of tons, it's something like 11,000 tons of crappy Holtec casks filled with nuclear waste that are sitting on top of, basically, what I call shifting sands of the unstable soil.
And I've actually read a lot of reports about unstable soil. And this can lead to the risk also of landslides which are not even being B-none of this seems to be considered, really, in the EIS, that I can find.
So I'm also wondering about, you know, the faulty non-approved design change of the whole tech basket and whatever happened with that. You know, I know there's a couple of them, actually there's about 135 of them spread all over the United States.
And I was under the impression that the NRC was going to be actually doing some serious fines for this violation, and that it was being escalated, and that it might even become civil fines. So I'd like to know about that, because this plant has that issue.
And then there's the issue of tritium which in apparently entirely disbursed to water ways and through the air. And the pathways for contamination for people and wildlife are breathing,
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 drinking the water, and eating fish. And these things can cause -- the tritium especially, can cause serious and deadly illnesses.
It crosses the placental barrier in pregnant women. It can cause DNA damage, it can cause developmental damage to fetuses and children. It's just elevated risk because of cancer and, of course, reduced fertility.
So this particular plant, and I've looked at the record, has had and continues to have serious tritium leaks. So you have all of these cumulative risks, risk factors. Plus you also have, which no one has mentioned, you have the issue the potential of synergistic tonicity of the water when something like tritium interacts with another element that's in the water. And this really needs to be investigated across the board for all plants, which all plants have tritium.
So I'm not going to go into the core problem of the actual facility
- itself, the maintenance, the functional issues, the lack of, you know, the problems there. But I'm just trying to, you know, having looked at the EIS, you're saying that there is no environmental reason to not allow this
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 plant operate for another 20 years. And I feel that the NRC is not taking climate change impacts and multiple risks into its analysis for this plant or any other plant. You're saying that the risks are relatively small, of course, although there's one that maybe is more complicated.
So there's two things that I'd like to say finally. I don't know if I'm at my three minute mark or four minute mark here. But I'd like to say that I don't believe that this comment period is long enough.
I am a relatively simple human being, I'm just a classical flutist, for God's sake. I have a hard time comprehending so many technical details. I, and other people, need more time. And, you know, the fact that you guys can take all the time in the world to do your report, and we only get a month or 45 days is really not fair to the public. So I am personally requesting that we should be having a full 90 days for a comment period.
And then finally, I would like to say that relicensing this plant to continue online, which is one of the oldest plants in the country already, it's kind of like creating a Frankenstein. Or maybe you want to make a more modern comparison, and that would
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 be to the new movie The Substance.
So I just feel that there's so many issues with allowing this plant to continue and that there are many risk factors that really cumulative that you are not taking into consideration. So I think that's all I'd like to say. Thank you very much.
MR. RAKOVAN: Thank you, Jackie. And as I think everyone picked up, we're going to go ahead and move on to our commenting portion of the meeting. And I see another hand which is Madison Schroder.
Madison, you should be able to un-mute and provide your comment.
Madison, are you with us? All right, try one more thing.
(Simultaneous speaking.)
MS. SCHRODER: Yes, that worked.
MR. RAKOVAN: Awesome, thank you.
MS. SCHRODER: Great, thank you for allowing public comments. My name is Madison Schroder here representing Generation Atomic and just wanted to say that, you know, we're happy to see the results from this draft EIS, though not surprised. And I want to thank you guys for the work that NRC does. And we're really looking forward to seeing this plant
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 relicensed. So thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: Happens at least once a meeting. Again, looking to see if anyone has any comments that they'd like to provide on the draft EIS.
Again, if you do, please use the raise my hand feature that you can find on Teams. If you are on the phone, you could press Star 5, and that will basically do the same thing, and provide a queue for me, and I will go one by one in hand in the order that I see them.
Once I activate your audio, you'll still need to un-mute. So again, if you're on Teams, that's just hitting your microphone button again. If you are on the phone that's Star 6 for the un-mute button. It may also work.
So I will go real quick though and go through again how you can provide comments on the draft EIS. You can send them to our office of administration. That's at mail stop TWFN7A60M, that's at Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
20555. You can go to the website, regulations.gov and search for docket ID NRC-2023-0136. Or you send an email to PerryEnvironmental, that's one
- word, PerryEnvironmental@nrc.gov.
Connie, I see you have your hand up. If
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 you want to un-mute and go ahead and provide your comments, please. Connie Kline?
MS. KLINE: Can you hear me?
MR. RAKOVAN: Yes, please.
MS. KLINE: Okay, thank you. I know yesterday there were several questions, and I actually reviewed the license renewal application and the DEIS last night, because I'm neurotic, which provoked a few other questions.
Do we include the questions with the comments when we comment in writing? Or, for example, I think, yes, Viktoria Mitlyng is on this call. Would the questions be sent to her? Would they be sent to you? What would be the procedure?
MR. RAKOVAN: So if you send us questions in addition to comments, we'll go ahead and bifurcate those. And then I will work with OPA to respond to your questions, and we'll make sure that your comments go into the binning and the process that we have to follow-up with those as we work on the final EIS. So yes, you can send those together if you'd like.
MS. KLINE: Okay. And would that include getting accession numbers for certain documents?
Certain documents are referenced without an accession
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 number. Well, some of them became Vistra documents that I think were Energy Harbor documents. I don't know if they're the same. That's one thing.
And then you referred to the August 6th final rule and environmental protection regulations.
I think I may have seen that, but there's no accession number for it. So I'm really not sure.
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay. So just to address your first question/comment, if there are documents that have improper references or aren't properly referenced in the draft EIS, that's certainly something that I would like to know so that we can get those fixed. So by all means please provide those comments.
(Simultaneous speaking.)
MR. RAKOVAN: In terms of -- I'm sorry, go ahead.
MS. KLINE: I'm not saying that they're improper.
MR. RAKOVAN: Oh, okay.
MS. KLINE: I'm saying that it's, at least to me, a little confusing. You know, some of them are not labeled Vistra that I think I may have seen as Energy Harbor documents. That's one issue. And then
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 there are some other references that don't have an accompanying accession number.
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay.
MS. KLINE: And so, you know, I'm not saying that there was a mistake, necessarily.
And then I have another question on something that came up yesterday. Are the chemical cleaning and industrial waste lagoons synonymous? Are they used interchangeably?
MR. RAKOVAN: Unfortunately, Leah is not with us today. She was the one who was answering all those questions yesterday. And she was not able to join us tonight. I apologize.
MS. KLINE: So would that just be another question to include?
MR. RAKOVAN: Yes. I'm sure that's something we could answer for you quite simply. But unfortunately, like I said, Leah was with us yesterday and was able to address those questions. And she's not with us this evening.
MS. KLINE: Okay. And just to kind of conclude for now, I looked up the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, or attempted to look that up. I know it's referred to in a number of areas in 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 license renewal application, for example.
It was confusing to me, because there appears to be one that applies to PWRs. I couldn't see one that specifically applied to BWRs. And some of the documentation was really old, so that's another thing. I would like an accession number for the most current applicable Offsite Dose Calculation Manual.
Let me see here, I came back to the chemical/industrial lagoons. I think they're probably the same, but on two different schematic maps they were labeled differently.
But does the waste that goes in there, let me ask if I have this correct. Some of that waste is liquid and some of it solid, is that right?
MR. RAKOVAN: I'm so sorry, I wish I could answer that, but again, I would have to rely on Leah, my SME.
MS. KLINE: Okay. And I'm presuming that
-- I couldn't find anything on the dimensions of those lagoons. And I couldn't discern whether the waste remains in there permanently, if it's periodically pumped out, and if it is, what happens to it if it's pumped out?
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay.
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 MS. KLINE: And let me see, and also someone else yesterday raised the issue of many, many deferrals, and waivers, and exemptions that were issued over, I'd say, at least a year's period. I could have been longer, when First Energy was, after bankruptcy was declared and First Energy was threatening to close the plants and all that, how would we find out what, if anything, what if anything may have been reversed for those deferrals and waivers?
I doubt that the exemptions were reversed, but what about, like, referrals, for example? Would we have to specifically cite those for you to find out what happened to them?
MR. RAKOVAN: I think that would certainly be the easiest way. If you wanted to send us a list, we could try to respond and try to figure out what all is out there in terms of exemption.
MS. KLINE: Okay. Let me see if there's anything else. I actually think that's probably it for right now for me. Thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay. Again, if you have any comments on the draft EIS that you'd like to provide today, please use the raise my hand feature
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 on MS Teams. Or if you're on the phone, that's Star
- 5. Again, once we activate your microphone you'll still need to un-mute. So that's just hitting your microphone button again if you're on Teams or hitting the un-mute or Star 6 for those of you on the phone.
So I'll pause to see if we get any additional hands.
All right, I'll use this opportunity, as I usually do, to remind folks that tonight is certainly not your last chance or only chance to provide comments. You can send them hard copy mail through our Office of Administration. That's Washington, D.C.
20555. You can look at regulations.gov and search for docket ID NRC-2023-0136, or you can send an email to PerryEnvironmental, again that's one
- word, PerryEnvironmental@nrc.gov.
I see that we have our 5837 number again.
Jackie, you want to go ahead and un-mute and provide your comment?
MS. DREXLER: Hi, Jackie Drexler again. I don't know how many other people are maybe on your Teams line that are waiting to speak. Are there people waiting to speak?
MR. RAKOVAN: I have two hands in addition to you right now.
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 MS. DREXLER: Okay, so how about I let other people speak, and then if there's time you'll come back to me.
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay, that would be fine if you want to defer.
MS. DREXLER: Is that --
MR. RAKOVAN: Yes, that's fine.
MS. DREXLER: Okay.
MR. RAKOVAN: All right, so I have Daryl Gale. Daryl, you should be able to un-mute and provide your comment at this time.
Daryl Gale? Give me a sec, we'll try one more thing. Daryl, your audio line is open, you should be able to un-mute and provide your comment.
All right, I'll go ahead and jump to my audio technical issue side. If you're unable to un-mute, you can drop off the line and call in to the conference line. That's one way.
You could also check your device setting.
So in Teams you want to look for those three little dots that say more and go through it to find settings and device settings just to make sure that you're using the audio devices that you're hoping to.
Again, Daryl Gale, your microphone has
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 been activated, so you need to un-mute in order to provide your comment at this time. Please feel free to do so at any point.
But I'm going to go ahead and allow Diane D'Arrigo to provide her comment. Diane, you should be able to un-mute and provide your comment at this time.
MS. D'ARRIGO: Hi, yes. Diane D'Arrigo, Nuclear Information and Resource Service. One of the things that I think about with regard to these kinds of questions, keeping the reactors operating, is who lives downstream and down wind. Who's in the primary direction.
And there has not really been, well, there was a health study done on radiation, well, on health effects around nuclear reactors back in the mid-to late 80's by UNSCEAR, I think it was, the United Nations Committee on Environment and Radiation. And that report was very flawed in that it looked at the populations all around the reactors and not in the primary wind direction.
And then we came close to having a study by the National Academy of Sciences that went through Phase 1 and was cancelled at the NRC's request when Phase 2 would have actually done health studies around
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 reactors.
So we don't know what the health impacts are downwind of reactors. And the communities that are downwind and downstream are not really being directly addressed or included in the -- I mean, they can call in and make comments as a couple of people have, but for the NRC to be able to say that it's a small impact or no
- impact, it's really an unsubstantiated claim on that.
And then the other piece of it also would be with regard to fish and life in the water downstream of the reactor which is routinely releasing radioactivity into the water.
I mean, supposedly it's being released at legal release levels, but every reactor is releasing radioactivity into the air and into the water on a regular basis. So the determination that's made by NRC that there is small or no impact is really without data, because there's no attempt made. If you don't look, you don't find.
So I do not believe that, and in the years that I have this issue, that there's ever been a real effort to look in a way that would potentially find a health impact.
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 So the and, then on the other piece of this is that the health issue is delegated, is reserved to the federal government, state and local governments, except under the Clean Air Act if they've got stricter standards.
And then some exceptions for the Clean Water Act, but overall the federal government preempts state and local governments from having stricter standards or having standards that are in conflict with the ones that the NRC has.
And yet the NRC is not looking to see what the real impacts are and basing its legal levels more on what is the amount that the industry is releasing rather than on the amount that humans or other species can withstand.
And the genetic effects obviously will be seen into the future, but in the radiation standards, the 10 CFR 20, they only look at, they only consider two generations, whereas the genetic damage could go on for many more generations then too. So that's one piece of concern.
And then another is having to do with some of the things that have been mentioned before. It sounds to me like the NRC has already made its
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 decision that this plant can continue, this reactor can continue to operate. And there would have to be something pretty earthshattering that would change your mind.
You're saying you're not the ones to make the decision on keeping it open or not. But it cannot be kept open if you were to say that there are concerns that are unresolved, that there are safety, or health, or environmental impacts that, and I guess this is only for the environmental part of it, that are not safe. But the NRC has never, ever, ever said that about any project, to my knowledge. And I've been tracking this since the very late 1970s.
So I reiterate some of the concerns that have been raised about seismic concerns, about earthquakes, about the erosion into the lakes, about landslides, about the integrity of the storage of the waste that's being generated, both the high so-called low level waste, the integrity of the building, the routine releases, legal releases, and then the radioactivity into the air and water, but then also the releases that are actually even higher than those legal ones that are allowed, and releases from other parts of the reactor than the place that it's supposed
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 to come out of, the pipe that goes into Lake Erie, and then with regard to emergency planning and the potential for even weakening the emergency planning at a time when the reactor could be even more dangerous.
I have seen from an NRC engineer, a bathtub curve that shows that at the beginning of a reactor's operating time and at the later point, the 20, 30, 40 year time, the older it gets the more likely there is for accidents. So that would be at the very beginning, and it should be in the end.
So we're so far, so good on major disasters, not having a major disaster at Perry. But the longer it operates the more likely that is to happen. And I haven't seen any kind of analysis of dealing with the aging and the deteriorating parts and systems, and components other than to just put your rubber stamp on low or no impact.
So we oppose the continued operation of the Perry reactor and think that it would be the best thing to do to replace it with cleaner, safer energy renewable non-extractive energy, and storage, energy storage, and putting it into a smart grid. Thanks.
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay, Daryl Gale, we're going to take another shot, I saw that you dropped off
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 and came back on. Daryl, hopefully you are able to un-mute and provide your comment at this time.
And, sir, your audio is active, Daryl. We just need you to un-mute.
MS. D'ARRIGO: Maybe you should describe where the un-mute real picture is, because that took me a minute to figure it out. It's either in the upper right or in the lower left, right?
MR. RAKOVAN: So we're looking for, if you can see my screen, a little microphone that looks like this. For me it is kind of in the upper right. I am on the Teams actual software though. For someone who is on Teams on a web browser, I'm not sure exactly where that would be. But again, you're looking for the microphone to un-mute.
Daryl, we'll keep your line open. So if at any time you want to jump on, by all means please jump on.
Jackie, if you wanted to go ahead and provide some additional comments, we don't have any other hands up. So, Jackie, you should be able to un-mute.
MS. DREXLER: Thank you again.
MR. RAKOVAN: Sure.
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 MS. DREXLER: I'm finding this to be a most civil discussion, kind of like last night's debate. And I won't get contentious, but I just have to say that there seems to be a big push on nuclear now. And I know I was on a hearing the other night, or the other day, regarding the ADVANCE Act and how you all are moving forward with the alphabet soup of things that you have to put into a report to Congress.
And, you know, it makes me really concerned when, as Diane mentioned, there are alternatives to creating this nuclear waste that we can't manage. There are alternatives to that that don't create the kind of waste that don't pollute to this kind of degree, that are much safer. And I just don't really understand why there's this big push to either keep these nuclear plants going.
And considering the amount of bailouts that many of them have been, you know, entitled to on the backs of rate payers, to keep these plants going, and all of the amazing amounts of billions of dollars that the Department of Energy is giving out to operators, or decommissioning, or people who wanted decommissioning and then become operators, you know, like if one-tenth of that money was used for real
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 renewable energy, we would not even be discussing having nuclear power plants.
And I just wanted to put that forward to all of you at the NRC, because the kind of, you know, I know that the Department of Energy is pushing forward but also trying to engage with young people so they'll become nuclear engineers so they can figure out the problems that we haven't figured out.
This is a terrible thing to be doing to our
- children, and grandchildren, and great grandchildren, and beyond, that they are the ones that are going to have to be figuring out what to do with this waste, how to keep our environment and people safe. And this is going to be there life time agenda of trying to save the world, basically, from meltdowns and from waste that has to be managed.
And I just don't understand why one would want to re-license a plant that's at the end of its life that has multiple problems. Really, I know that you knocked out several different alternatives. You said they weren't good. And that was good. But really keeping it open is the worst alternative. So I just needed to say that. Thank you very much.
MR. RAKOVAN: Thank you. I'll pause
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 again, Daryl Gale, Daryl, if you're able to un-mute please do so and provide your comment.
If anyone else would like a chance at the mic, I'll go ahead and pause to see. But right now Daryl is the only hand that I have. And unfortunately I'm not sure that they're able to un-mute.
So, Daryl, again if you're not able to provide your comments tonight, then please use one of the other mechanisms at your disposal to provide your comments on the draft EIS.
I'll pause just another moment, just to see. Connie Kline? Connie, you should be able to un-mute and provide your comment on the draft EIS.
MS. KLINE: Can you hear me?
MR. RAKOVAN: Yes.
MS. KLINE I think I may know the answer to this too, but I'd like to confirm it. Is there any mechanism to appeal your conclusions in the DEIS?
MR. RAKOVAN: So if you're asking for terms of contentions, I believe the contentions that were filed against Perry were dismissed.
MS. KLINE: Yes, I'm well aware of that.
I participated in the intervention. And we did have an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board hearing. But now
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 this is at a different stage. I think we've exhausted any remedies, but I'm just curious as to whether I'm missing something here.
MR. RAKOVAN: I am not familiar with the processes outside of the typical, you know, hearing and oral argument type things. I suppose you could contact the Commission directly, but I really can't advise you. I really don't know, Connie. I'm sorry.
MS. KLINE: Okay. Because there are some hypergeological aspects that, actually from the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, that were unknown to us at the time that we filed for a hearing.
So there is some new information. You know, I'm basically asking, other than a 2.206 petition, is there any other avenue?
MR. RAKOVAN: If you would like to provide the additional information that you're referring to as part of a comment, we'll certainly take that into account as we work in the final EIS.
In terms of additional ways to prevent the plant from being relicensed, I really don't know, outside of the 2.206 petition process, Connie.
MS. KLINE: Well, I'm not even saying --
you know, the regulator needs to see this information.
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 And I'm asking, is there another avenue besides the 2.206 petition, in addition to a 2.206 petition? And I'm hearing no.
MR. RAKOVAN: Well, there's this process that you can provide us if there's information --
MS. KLINE: Yes.
MR. RAKOVAN: -- that we missed or didn't take into account, we'd certainly like to know about that as we work to finalize the document.
MS. KLINE: Okay. You know, we had a nationally renowned and recognized geologist on the call yesterday. And as I said, she's uncovered some information that wasn't available when we filed to intervene.
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay.
MS. KLINE: Okay, thank you.
MR. RAKOVAN: Okay, I'm going to give Daryl Gale one last shot. Daryl Gale, your microphone has been activated. I just need you to un-mute to provide your comments.
All right. Well, Daryl, again, if you could see the screen, please use one of the other ways to provide your comments on the draft EIS. I apologize if you're having technical issues un-muting
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 and providing your comments through tonight's meeting.
With that, I think I'm going to go ahead, oh, all right, Jackie, one last chance at the microphone before we close? Jackie, you should be able to provide your comment.
MS. DREXLER: So here's the thing, you know, I tried coming on to the meeting the other day.
I couldn't get on. I don't know whether it's my problem with Microsoft Teams or your problem. I really resent having to do this by phone and not being able to see anyone or anything.
And, you know, so here's the thing.
During COVID the whole world moved to Zoom. And, you know, during these kinds of hearings, we are not and you are not showing anything that's proprietary that has to be redacted from the public. I just don't understand why you cannot make this accessible for the public. It is so awkward and non-inclusive. It really is, it's really a terrible way of doing business.
I understand there are some hearings, especially always with Holtec, where there's redacted information, or proprietary stuff, or blah, blah, blah. But this isn't that kind of situation. And I
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 really feel that you could be making it much more user friendly. You know, I have the same issue with the Public Service Commission. It really blocks out people.
Thank you very much, that's all. Thank you really for the opportunity and the multiple opportunities tonight.
MR. RAKOVAN: All right. Thanks, Jackie.
John, I'll turn it over to you if you'd like to move to close.
MR. MOSES: Thanks, Lance, I appreciate it. And also I really appreciate everyone taking their time to attend today's meeting, and for those of you who attended yesterday's meeting as well, and for your comments and questions.
Before I get into next steps, I just want to clarify a couple of things. Fortunately the slides are available publicly on the NRC website. And we can discuss that or share that with you if that helps.
Let's see, is there a way, I think the links right on the early slides, right, Lance?
MR. RAKOVAN: Yes, it's on the first slide that I have to show.
MR. MOSES: So I will read that off. It
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 may be a little complicated, but I'll read it off for those of you who can't see it.
It's https://www.nrc.gov/P as in Paul, M as in Mary, N as in Nancy, S as in Sam, forward slash, M as in Mary, T as in Tom, G as in green, question mark, D as in delta, O as in onion, equal sign, D as in delta, E as in echo, T as in Tom, A as in apple, I as in igloo, L as in lemon, S as in Sam, ampersand, which is also the and symbol, capital C as in carrot, O as in onion, D as in delta, E as in echo, equal sign, and the rest are all numbers, 20241114. Hopefully that will help.
The other is I think, correct me if I'm wrong, Lance, if people go to the public meeting notice system in nrc.gov --
MR. RAKOVAN: The public meeting schedule, yes.
MR. MOSES: Thank you, public meeting schedule system on nrc.gov, of if you click on the home page, look for public meetings. You can scroll to today's date, scroll further down, find Perry Nuclear Plant public meeting, and then you'll be able to find the link without me trying to read out the code. And hopefully that helps you get a better sense of looking at it.
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 With that, I would also like to summarize our next steps. We are currently about half way through the scoping period, excuse me, of the public comment period of the draft Environmental Impact Statement.
Our team will gather the comments that we heard today as well as comments that we've received through other means, such as regulations.gov, email, and postal mail letters. The team will compile their comments, evaluate them, and then incorporate any changes to the draft Environmental Impact Statement.
We anticipate issuing the final Environmental Impact Statement for Perry in April 2025. And once again, I personally appreciate everyone's efforts, and thoughts, and comments. I apologize for those who had difficulty accessing the team's system or being able to voice their comments.
And I hope everyone has a wonderful evening tonight. And I look forward --
MR. RAKOVAN: Hold on, John, one thing, one quick thing.
MR. MOSES: Okay.
MR. RAKOVAN: Connie, if you'll notice on the slide I put in the accession number for the
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 license renewal GEIS. It's ML24086A526. You asked about that earlier, and was able to find that. So if you go to that, that will give you the recent license renewal generic Environmental Impact Statement. And that should have additional information in terms of about the rule and such as well.
Jackie, I see you've got your hand up.
Can I ask real quick if you've got a question?
MS. DREXLER: I hate to sound like a complainer but, you know, tonight was the first night of Rosh Hashanah. And I just feel like, you know, I had a nice invitation to spend some time with friends.
But here I am doing this.
And I just, I really don't understand how you could be holding a meeting, a session, whatever, you know, at the time of a Jewish holiday like this.
It's just kind of inconceivable to me. It's like our water company turning off the water Easter and Passover, like when you're having a dinner with 20 people.
So I hope in the future that you will check schedules for Jewish holidays, Christian holidays, Muslim holidays, and that you might take that into consideration when you're scheduling these
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 kinds of meetings, okay. That's all, thank you very much.
MR. RAKOVAN: Appreciate the suggestion, thank you, Jackie.
MR. MOSES: All right. And once again, thank you for those suggestions and other suggestions for us to improve our process. We sincerely appreciate it. So with that, I'll close the meeting, and wish you a wonderful evening. Thank you.
(Whereupon, the above-entitled matter went off the record at 7:14 p.m.)