ML091870099: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Line 16: Line 16:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:Official Transcript of Proceedings  
{{#Wiki_filter:Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Title:        Duane Arnold Energy Center Public Meeting: Afternoon Session Docket Number:    50-331 Location:        Hiawatha, Iowa Date:            Wednesday, April 22, 2009 Work Order No.:  NRC-2777                          Pages 1-35 NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC.
Court Reporters and Transcribers 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 234-4433


NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION  
1 1                        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2                    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3                                    + + + + +
4            Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 5                                +    +    +    +      +
6                      DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER 7            Regarding the Renewal of Facility Operating 8                    License for a 20-Year Period 9                                    WEDNESDAY 10                              APRIL 22, 2009 11                                +    +    +    +      +
12                            HIAWATHA CITY HALL 13                            101 EMMONS STREET 14                              HIAWATHA, IOWA 15                                +    +    +    +      +
16                    The    above-entitled                matter  commenced 17 pursuant        to  Notice      before        Maurice      Heath,  Project 18 Manager at 101 Emmons Street, Hiawatha, Iowa 52233, 19 on Wednesday, April 22, 2009, at 1:30 p.m.
20 PRESENT:
21 NRC STAFF:
22 Maurice Heath - Project Manager 23 Charles Eccleston 24 Scott Burnell NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701            www.nealrgross.com


Title:  Duane Arnold Energy Center     Public Meeting: Afternoon Session
2 1 Caroline Tilton 2                          P R O C E E D I N G S 3                                                                      (1:30 P.M.)
4                      MR. HEATH:            Good      afternoon    everybody.
5 Welcome to the meeting.                      We're going to talk about 6 the        Duane    Arnold      Energy        Center        license    renewal 7 application.            My name is Maurice Heath and I'm a 8 Project          Manager    at      the      U.S.        Nuclear  Regulatory 9 Commission, or NRC as you're going to hear us call 10 it today.          And I'll be your facilitator as well, so 11 bear with me with that.                        And I will also be the 12 first presenter of the afternoon.
13                      The  purpose        of    today's        meeting    is      to 14 provide you an opportunity to give your comments on 15 what the environmental issues that the NRC should 16 consider          during    its      review        of      the   Duane   Arnold 17 Energy         Center   license        renewal            application.            The 18 meeting will essentially have two parts.                              The first 19 we'll          have  a  presentation            from        NRC  staff  on        the 20 license          renewal    process          and      environmental      review 21 process.
22                      I'm not sure if everybody knows that on 23 the back table we have sign in sheets and we also 24 have a copy of today's presentation if you'd like a NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com


Docket Number: 50-331
3 1 copy.          Also in back we have a sign up for anybody 2 who wants to speak during the comment period at the 3 end.          We ask that you put your name down, if you 4 didn't already, that's okay, you can still get on 5 and give comments, but please fill it out before you 6 leave just so we can get it on the transcript.                                    We 7 want to make sure that we can accurately have your 8 correct spelling and make sure that everything is 9 all clean on the transcript.
10                      So like I said, we have a court reporter 11 here.          He will be transcribing the meeting, so when 12 you give a comment we'd ask that you please say your 13 name and spell it for the court reporter.                          And also, 14 if      you      have  any    affiliations,              please name      your 15 affiliation.
16                      One of the items before we get started, 17 we do have NRC comment forms in the back, so if 18 you'd like to comment on how the meeting ran, we 19 would like you to fill that out and you can just 20 send it back to us.                    You don't have to have any 21 postage on it.            You just fill it out and then send 22 it back and it will come actually directly to me, 23 and so we can receive that.
24                      Just for your knowledge in case anybody NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701          www.nealrgross.com


Location:   Hiawatha, Iowa
4 1 doesn't know, the restrooms are out the back door 2 and to the left.
3                  Now with that, we're just going to go 4 right into our presentation.                          First, I'd like to 5 introduce      Mr. Charles Eccleston.                    He's a Project 6 Manager as well just like myself, but he's going to 7 talk about the environmental process, environmental 8 scoping.
9                  Now,    today's          meeting        will   provide          an 10 overview      of    the    license          renewal        process,      which 11 includes both the safety and environmental as I said 12 earlier.        But    the      most      important        thing    in        the 13 meeting today is that we get the comments that you 14 have on the environmental review.                            So we'll also 15 give a chance for you to submit any written comments 16 and give it to us as well.
17                  At      the          conclusion            of      today's 18 presentation, we'll be happy to answer any questions 19 that you have.          However, I'm going to have to ask 20 you to limit your participation with questions only 21 at that time where we have another designated time 22 to receive your comments for the record.                          So once we 23 get all the questions asked, then we'll stop that 24 portion and go directly to the comments if you'd NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433              WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701            www.nealrgross.com


Date:   Wednesday, April 22, 2009
5 1 like to add your comments to the record.
2                      Before I get into the process, I'd like 3 to take a minute to talk about NRC in terms of what 4 we do and what our mission is.                            The NRC is a federal 5 agency established in the Energy Reorganization Act 6 of 1974 and it regulates the civilian use of nuclear 7 material.            The Atomic Energy Act of 1954 authorized 8 the NRC to grant a 40 year license.                                The 40 year 9 term          is    based    on      economic            considerations          and 10 antitrust factors, not on the safety or technical 11 limitations.            The Atomic Energy Act also allows for 12 license renewal.
13                      Now, the National Environmental Policy 14 Act of 1969, otherwise known as NEPA, established a 15 national            policy    that        requires            federal    decision 16 makers            to    assess        and        consider        impacts          and 17 alternatives to a proposal before reaching a final 18 decision          to   pursue      an      action.            As  a  matter          of 19 policy,           the  NRC  has      determined            that  the  reactor 20 license renewal constitutes a major federal action 21 in      which we will prepare an Environmental Impact 22 Statement.
23                      The NRC's regulations governing nuclear 24 safety,          security    and      environmental            protection        are NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                  WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701            www.nealrgross.com


Work Order No.: NRC-2777 Pages 1-35
6 1 contained          in    Title      10      of    the        Code  of  Federal 2 Regulations, which are referred to as 10 CFR.                                         An 3 exercise          in  the    regulatory            authority,        the    NRC's 4 mission is threefold:                 to insure adequate protection 5 of      public    health    and      safety;          promote    the    common 6 defense          and    security;            and          to    protect          the 7 environment.
8                      The NRC accomplishes its mission through 9 a combination of regulatory programs and processes 10 such          as  establishing            rules          and    regulations, 11 conducting inspections, issuing enforcement actions, 12 assessing          licensee        performance,              and    evaluating 13 operating          experience        for      nuclear          plants    in      this 14 country and internationally.
15                      The NRC also has resident inspectors at 16 all operating nuclear plants.                              The inspectors are 17 considered the eyes and ears of the NRC.                              They carry 18 out the safety mission on a daily basis and are on 19 the        front    lines      to      insuring            acceptable      safety 20 performance            and        compliance                with    regulatory 21 requirements.
22                      Now,  with      Duane        Arnold,      their    current 23 operating license expires February 21st, 2014 and 24 their license renewal was submitted to us on October NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com


NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC. Court Reporters and Transcribers 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W.
7 1 1st,          2008.      A    license          renewal        application          is 2 required            to    contain        these          elements:        general 3 information            such      as    applicant's              name,    address, 4 business          and    administrative              information;        technical 5 information which pertains to the aging management 6 and        this    is    the      focus        of        the    safety    review; 7 technical specifications which define the operating 8 parameters of the plant.                        The application indicates 9 what, if any, changes or additions to the technical 10 specifications are necessary to manage the effect of 11 the aging during the period of extended operation.
Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 234-4433
12                      And      last        but          not      least    in        the 13 application is the Environmental Report, which is 14 the        applicant's        assessment            of      the  environmental 15 impacts of continued operation.                                This information 16 serves          as a starting point for the environmental 17 review.
18                      The license renewal process involves two 19 parallel reviews as I mentioned, the safety aspect 20 and        the    environmental          aspect.              Now,  the    safety 21 review focuses on aging effects of passive and long 22 lived components and structures that the NRC deems 23 important            to    plant        safety.              The  staff's        main 24 objective          is to determine whether the effects of NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                  WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com
 
8 1 aging will be adequately managed by the applicant.
2 The review also considers generic and site-specific 3 operating          experience        related            to    the  effects          of 4 aging.            The    results        of      the        safety    review          are 5 documented in the Safety Evaluation Report, or as we 6 call it, SER.
7                      For  the      environmental              review,    the        NRC 8 evaluates environmental impacts of continued plant 9 operations          for  an    additional              20    years.      The        NRC 10 prepares            an    Environmental                    Impact      Statement, 11 otherwise          known    as      the      EIS,          which    is    publicly 12 available and discloses these impacts.
13                      The EIS also evaluates impacts of other 14 reasonable          alternatives          to    license        renewal.            The 15 public          is    afforded        an      opportunity            to    provide 16 comments and input which help shape the scope of the 17 EIS        analysis.        The      public        is      also  afforded          the 18 opportunity to comment on the accuracy of the draft 19 EIS.          The goal is to provide the decision makers 20 with        sufficient    environmental                information      so      they 21 can        make    a  reasoned      choice          between      the    proposed 22 license renewal action and reasonable alternatives.
23                      Now, I'd like to mention a few things 24 that come up in public meetings but they are usually NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701                www.nealrgross.com
 
9 1 outside        the  scope    of    license          renewal. However, 2 these items are dealt with in an ongoing regulatory 3 oversight and they are emergency planning, security 4 and current safety performance as defined by the NRC 5 inspection findings, violations, general assessment 6 and planning.          For specifically at Duane Arnold, the 7 link below, which is also in your handouts, is the 8 location where you can find the performance of the 9 Duane Arnold Energy Center.
10                    Now, this diagram illustrates the safety 11 and        the environmental review processes.                      It also 12 features          two      other          considerations          in          the 13 commission's decision of whether or not to renew an 14 operating license.              One of these considerations is 15 the        independent    review        performed        by  the  Advisory 16 Committee          on    Reactor            Safeguards,        or      ACRS.
17 Statutorily        mandated by the Atomic Energy Act of 18 1954, the ACRS is a group of scientists and nuclear 19 safety experts who serve as a consulting body to the 20 commission.          The ACRS reviews the license renewal 21 application and the NRC status SER.                            And the ACRS 22 reports their findings and recommendations directly 23 to the commission.
24                    Hearings          may        also      be    conducted.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433              WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701            www.nealrgross.com
 
10 1 Interested            stakeholders          may        submit    concerns          or 2 contentions and request a hearing.                            An adjudicatory 3 panel          from the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 4 will          be  established        to      review        contentions        for 5 admissibility.                If      a      hearing        is  granted        the 6 commission          considers        the      outcome        of  the  hearing 7 process in its decision making for whether or not to 8 issue a renewed operating license.
9                      Now,  I    want        to    describe    the  license 10 renewal          process  in      a    little          more  detail.          The 11 regulations governing license renewal are based on 12 two guiding principles.                    To effectively communicate 13 these principles I need to describe a concept used 14 by the NRC.            The concept is licensing basis.
15                      Now, licensing basis consists of a wide 16 range          of  design  and      operational            requirements        and 17 conditions that must be met for the plant to comply 18 with its operating license.                        It serves as the basis 19 upon which the NRC originally licensed the plant and 20 to continue to operate, the plant it must conform 21 with its licensing basis.
22                      The first principle is that the current 23 regulatory process is adequate to insure that the 24 licensing basis for all operating plants provide and NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701            www.nealrgross.com
 
11 1 maintain an acceptable level of safety.                              The second 2 principle          is  that    the      current          plant's  extending 3 licensing          basis    must        be      maintained        during        the 4 renewal term in the same manner and to the same 5 extent          as  during  the      original            license  term.          In 6 other words, the same rules apply that applied under 7 the        current    license      will      apply        into  the  renewal 8 term.
9                      In  addition,          a    renewed        license      will 10 include conditions that must be met to insure the 11 aging          of  structures        and      components          important          to 12 safety are adequately managed so that the plant's 13 current          licensing    basis        is    maintained        during        the 14 period of extended operation.
15                      The  safety      review          is    a  very  rigorous 16 review.            The staff reviews the applicant's license 17 renewal          application        and      supporting          documentation.
18 Now, this review includes an evaluation of new and 19 existing          programs    and      surveillance            activities          to 20 determine with reasonable assurance that the effects 21 of aging for certain plant structures and components 22 will be adequately managed or monitored.
23                      The  safety        review          also    includes      site 24 audits to verify the technical basis of the license NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com
 
12 1 renewal        application        and        to        confirm    that          the 2 applicant's aging management programs and activities 3 conform        with  how      they      are          described    in        the 4 application.          The    staff        documents          the  basis        and 5 conclusions        of  its      review        in      the  SER  which          is 6 publicly        available.            In      addition,        a    team          of 7 specialized inspectors travels to the reactor site 8 to verify the aging management programs have been 9 implemented, modified or planned consistent with the 10 license renewal application.
11                    Finally, I'll mention the ACRS performs 12 an        independent    review          of      the      license    renewal 13 application and SER and makes a recommendation to 14 the commission.
15                    Next, I'll turn it over to Charles so he 16 can go over the environmental review and the scoping 17 process.
18                    MR. ECCLESTON:                  Hello.        I    am        the 19 Environmental Project Manager for this proposal and 20 we're now going to turn the lecture over to a review 21 of the environmental process that we're undertaking 22 for this particular project.
23                    In 1969 the U.S. Congress passed what 24 has become a very historic and very important act.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433              WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com
 
13 1 It      was    the  National      Environmental              Policy  Act        of 2 1969.          It's of such historical significance that now 3 over        100 nations around the world have basically 4 passed an act similar to our original NEPA.
5                    NEPA    is      basically              important  for        two 6 different aspects.              First of all, it establishes the 7 basic national environmental policy or the national 8 environmental charter for the entire United States.
9  It was the first major environmental legislation to 10 ever pass -- legislation to ever pass in the United 11 States.          Following NEPA, virtually every other law 12 and regulation that we have dealing with NEPA came 13 after the event in its footsteps and it is designed 14 to implement the policy that NEPA set up.                                So it's 15 important from that perspective, but probably even 16 more so under NEPA it requires that an Environmental 17 Impact Statement be prepared for all major federal 18 actions significantly affecting the quality of the 19 human environment.
20                    Now, the NRC has come out and basically 21 said that license renewal projects are projects that 22 need an EIS, so that's why we're here today.                                      I'd 23 like to also point out something, another interest 24 here.            According      to    NEPA,          you    must  follow          an NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com
 
14 1 objective interdiscip linary and systematic process 2 in preparing the EIS.
3                      Now, let's see why that's important.                            It 4 has to be an objective process.                              They have to be 5 able to stand up to scientific scrutiny.                                There is 6 no room for bias in this analysis.                                It has to be 7 interdisciplinary.                  NEPA      touches        virtually      every 8 discipline          that    somebody            could      think    of      from 9 biology,          geology,    hydrology,            economics,      sociology.
10 It brings all these disciplines together and these 11 experts in these disciplines prepare the analysis 12 that goes into the EIS.                      And it's systematic.                  And 13 by that it means that the agency must follow a very 14 systematic          structured process.                    It's not a wishy 15 washy process.              It has to be a very well thought 16 out,        very  systematic,        very      structured        process          in 17 preparing          the  EIS.        So    it's        important    from      that 18 standpoint.
19                      Under    NEPA        the      EIS    must    rigorously 20 investigate          environmental            impacts        of  the    license 21 renewal project and its alternatives.                              The purpose 22 of the EIS is to inform federal decision makers and 23 to publicly disclose the impacts of the proposal and 24 the            reasonable        alternatives,                including            the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com
 
15 1 alternative of taking no action at all, which in 2 this case would be not renewing the license for the 3 Duane          Arnold  Energy        Center.              Those    have    to        be 4 evaluated.
5                    Here    is    a    simplified            schematic      of        a 6 basic EIS process.              It's actually in reality quite a 7 bit more complicated than this, but this shows the 8 basic most important aspects of preparing the EIS.
9 Note that the yellow blocks here is where the public 10 has        the  opportunity        to      become          involved    in        the 11 process, provide comments, provide input, review the 12 documents and basically get engaged in the process.
13  NEPA is a very open process.
14                    Now,    the      EIS        process        starts        with 15 issuance of a Notice of Intent.                                That's an NOI.
16 That kicks the EIS process off.                              Once the NOI is 17 published in the Federal Register, we begin a public 18 scoping process, right here, and included in that 19 public scoping process is a public scoping meeting, 20 which is why we're here today.                        This is it.
21                    The purpose of the scoping process is to 22 solicit public comments and public input in terms of 23 what        the  public  views        as    important        in  terms          of 24 shaping the scope of the EIS that will be prepared.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com
 
16 1  So the public has, and that's what we're, like I 2 said, that's what we're here today to do.                          And then 3 until May 25th, that's what we're going to be doing 4 is interacting with the public, trying to find out 5 what the public thinks is important to put into this 6 EIS.
7                    Once we determine the scope of the EIS, 8 then          we move  down        and        we      prepare  a    draft 9 Supplemental        Environmental            Impact      Statement,        and 10 I'll explain what I mean by supplemental.                        Don't get 11 hung up on that right now.                      I'll explain that in a 12 couple of slides as to why they're saying it's a 13 supplemental EIS.
14                    But we prepare the supplemental EIS and 15 then after we prepare it, we issue it to the public.
16  It's publicly issued.                The public has the ability 17 to take a look at the EIS and provide comments and 18 feedback.        If they don't agree with the conclusions 19 in the EIS or if they don't agree, or if they think 20 it's not adequate or didn't cover something, that's 21 the        public's opportunity to provide input.                          That 22 input is addressed by the NRC and the input is used 23 to prepare the final EIS.
24                    The final EIS is again sent back out.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433              WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701            www.nealrgross.com
 
17 1 It's        publicly  issued.            Again,          the public  has        an 2 opportunity to review that final EIS and basically 3 see what it says.                And then from that point the 4 agency, in this case the NRC, publishes a Record of 5 Decision, or ROD.              That is where the agency using 6 the        EIS  and  other      factors          that      they  believe          is 7 important in reaching the decision, that is where 8 they document that in a publicly available ROD, so 9 the public can see what the decision is.                            And only 10 then can the agency do any action or anything in 11 terms of or related to the proposal to re-license 12 the Duane Arnold Energy Center.
13                    I think the most important thing here 14 that I want to put out there is this is a very 15 systematic process.              A lot of steps go through this 16 and no decision, no decision at all regarding the 17 proposal can be made until we reach this step at the 18 end of the process.                And no action with respect to 19 re-issuing the license or denying the license, for 20 that matter, or any other alternative that the NRC 21 might choose to do, can be taken until we've gone 22 through this entire process.
23                    The purpose of this meeting, and I think 24 this is really important because sometimes people NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433              WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701            www.nealrgross.com
 
18 1 get the wrong idea about the public scoping meeting, 2 the        purpose    of  this        meeting          is  not  to  make          a 3 decision regarding the proposal for a prospective 4 license renewal.            Instead, the purpose is to solicit 5 public input, public comment regarding the scope of 6 the EIS.          And again, I want to emphasize that EIS 7 will        then  be  used    once      it's        done,    gone  through 8 public          review,    and        making          the    final    decision 9 regarding the renewal of license application.
10                    So what we are particularly interested 11 in      in    this  meeting      and      during        the  entire    public 12 scoping process, which will run through May 25th, is 13 determining what the public believes is the scope of 14 actions they want to see in the EIS.                              What is the 15 scope of the basic impacts and issues they want to 16 see        evaluated    in    the        EIS,        and  what    are        the 17 particular alternative and mitigation measures that 18 they want to see in the EIS.                      This is basically what 19 we're trying to pan in on at today's meeting here.
20                    I think it's important just to take a 21 moment and talk about this GEIS and this SEIS.                                  Back 22 in 1998, the NRC was doing re-licensing projects and 23 they decided that what they wanted to do was look at 24 all the licensing projects that are worked on and NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com
 
19 1 try to get a common set of impacts that they could 2 make          common  conclusions            about        that  would          be 3 applicable to all re-licensing projects.                          They found 4 69 different impacts where they could make basically 5 general conclusions that would be applicable to any 6 kind of re-licensing project.                          The put it into this 7 GEIS, this Generic EIS.
8                      What  we    are      preparing        for  the    Duane 9 Arnold is a Site-Specific Supplemental EIS, and we 10 say        supplemental    because          it's        supplementing        the 11 conclusions that were printed to the Generic EIS.
12 And the NRC will basically be looking at evaluating 13 any new or significant information concerning the 14 general conclusions reached in the GEIS.                          So this is 15 how these two EIS's interface and interrelate with 16 one another.
17                      Now, in addition to the scoping process 18 and the scoping meeting that we're having today, in 19 addition to that, to supplement that the NRC also 20 goes out and consults with federal, state and local 21 agencies.          And examples of this would be like the 22 Fish            and    Wildlife            Service,            the    National 23 Oceanographic          and    Atmospheric              Administration,        the 24 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, as well native NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701            www.nealrgross.com
 
20 1 American tribes that could be potentially affected 2 by this project.
3                      We go out and consult with them and then 4 along          with,  or  the      input        we      receive    from    these 5 consultations            and      scoping          comments        that      we're 6 receiving, like from the meeting today, we take all 7 that stuff and that is used to determine the focus 8 of what's going to be going into that EIS.
9                      In this case, it's been very common that 10 we're          going  to  be    looking          at      impacts  to  just          a 11 diverse          array  of    different            kinds      of  impacts        and 12 issues          that    affect      people        and      the  environment, 13 everything from fish and wildlife impacts to air and 14 water resource impacts, impacts to historical and 15 cultural resources, human health impacts, land use 16 impacts.            And  then      there's          also    social    economic 17 impacts, which are often very important to the local 18 citizens in a project like that.
19                      And  in    terms        of      the    social    economic 20 impacts we're going to be looking at the impact on 21 taxes,          community        development,                social    impacts, 22 environmental justice impacts, and then a host of 23 other impacts or issues that we feel is important in 24 weighing the final decision as to which action we NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com
 
21 1 want to take.
2                    So what we're basically asking here is 3 to get input.            What are the common issues that you 4 believe the EIS should focus on?                          What are the local 5 environmental          impacts        or      issues        that    should          be 6 examined in the EIS?                  What reasonable alternatives 7 or      mitigation      measures          are      appropriate      for      this 8 area?          That's the kind of input we're trying to 9 receive from this scoping meeting.
10                    This basically is important because the 11 entire process is a decision making process.                                      And 12 this shows how everything comes together to reach an 13 ultimate decision.                Here we are, right up here at 14 the        top,  we're  in    this      area        right    here.      We're 15 trying to determine the scope of the EIS.                                Once we 16 determine the scope of the EIS, that will be the 17 entry          to  the    preparation              of      the    Supplemental 18 Environmental Impact Statement.
19                    And once the Supplemental Environmental 20 Impact Statement is complete, the conclusions and 21 the information will be used by NRC in making a 22 decision about the license renewal.                            But that's not 23 the        only  things    or      factors          that    lead  into        the 24 decision.          That's a key principle part of it, but in NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com
 
22 1 addition          to  that    as    Maurice            was    talking    about, 2 there's          going  to      be      a      very        rigorous    Safety 3 Evaluation Report.              The information from that will 4 feed into the decision.
5                      We    have            regional            and    planned 6 inspections.            Information from that will feed into 7 the decision.            The license renewal application that 8 was          prepared    by      the        applicant          will    provide 9 information that will lead into the final decision.
10  We also have an independent Advisory Committee on 11 Reactor          Safeguards    that      will        provide    information, 12 possibly recommendations which again, feed into the 13 final          decision.      All      this      information        is    coming 14 together to help and assist the NRC in making the 15 wisest possible decision, the most informed decision 16 possible.
17                      So  in    addition          to      receiving    comments 18 here        at the scoping meeting, there's three other 19 ways you can provide comments to us, and this is in 20 your handout.            You can provide it by mail.                              The 21 address          is  in  your      handout.              You  can  provide 22 comments by e-mail, this e-mail address there.                                      If 23 you        happen    to  be    in    the      Washington,        D.C.      area 24 walking down the street, you can stop into the NRC NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com
 
23 1 office        and  hand    deliver          comments      right    there.
2 Comments should be submitted by May 25th of this 3 year.
4                    This is a table, a matrix of some of the 5 key dates on the EIS schedule that you may or may 6 not find important or they might affect how you want 7 to interface into the process.                          I'm not going to 8 belabor on this table.                    It's in your packet, but 9 there are the dates if you have any questions about 10 the dates.
11                    Finally, additional information.                  If you 12 want additional information you can contact Maurice 13 Heath at this number here.                          Again, it's in your 14 handout, or myself at this number.                        We have also put 15 pertinent files, pertinent manuals and documents on 16 file with the Hiawatha Public Library.                          You can go 17 there.          And pertinent documents will also be put 18 onto the NRC's website.                  So there's an area if you 19 want to get more information about this proposal, 20 there's where you go.
21                    And with that, I guess I'll turn it back 22 over to you, Maurice.
23                    MR. HEATH:          Thank you.          Now, with that 24 I'd like to open it up.                        Does anybody have any NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433              WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701          www.nealrgross.com
 
24 1 questions they would like to ask?
2                                    (No response.)
3                    One  thing      to      note,        if  you  do      have 4 questions or maybe you come up with questions later, 5 we have this, what we call FAQ, Frequently Asked 6 Questions.          It's on the side table.                  It will be to 7 your left over there.
8                    There's    a    few      copies.        I'll  describe 9 one.          It's full of questions and answers that we 10 usually get, typically get at some of these scoping 11 meetings.          So just grab one on your way out just for 12 reading material if you want.                           And if you run out, 13 please just let me know so I can get an address and 14 get you a copy of it.
15                    Well,  if    we      don't        have any  questions 16 then we'll move on to the comment period.                            We have 17 one speaker here registered to speak.
18                    MR. BROWN:        I'm the only one?
19                    MR. HEATH:        Yes, so far, and if anybody 20 else does, I still ask for you to sign the list and 21 after Mr. Brown is finished, actually can you speak 22 into the microphone?              First just state your name and 23 spell it.          And also for the scoping comment period, 24 we usually ask to just bear with no more than 10 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433              WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701            www.nealrgross.com
 
25 1 minutes for your comments just in case we do have 2 somebody else that changes their mind and wants to 3 speak.        Thank you, go ahead.
4                    MR. BROWN:          Thanks.            My name is Bennett 5 Brown, B-e-n-n-e-t-t, last name is Brown, like the 6 color.          I live in Iowa City.                    I teach high school 7 physics in Solon.              I studied physics at MIT.                        I've 8 worked in a reactor briefly, and I'm not afraid of 9 nuclear          reactors      but      I    don't        feel  that        this 10 particular one should be renewed.                            I do acknowledge 11 it's got an excellent staff and I support your jobs, 12 and I think that the money spent at the reactor on 13 employment          could    be      better        spent      with  a    better 14 source of energy and I'd like to mention what I'd 15 like to see the SEIS include in terms of impacts and 16 alternatives.
17                    Specifically, the Department of Natural 18 Resources and the state of Iowa assessed the state's 19 wind resource and concluded that the state of Iowa 20 developing only class 4 jacobs sites.                                These are 21 currently          developable        at      two        and-a-half    cents          a 22 kilowatt          hour,  would        produce            six  times    as      much 23 electricity as needed by the state of Iowa.
24                    The      Midwest              Independent          Systems NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com
 
26 1 Operators as well as other utility grid operators 2 have        studied    how    much      wind        penetration      the      grid 3 could sustain given the variability of the wind and 4 concluded that we could provide 15 to 25 percent of 5 our electricity from wind without any alterations in 6 the existing grid.              So the percentage of electricity 7 produced          in  the    state      of    Iowa        from  Duane    Arnold 8 could          easily  be    replaced          by      wind  turbines      with 9 existing technology and existing market support.
10                      The second thing that I'd like to see 11 that the SEIS addresses is the effect on employment 12 decommissioning.                As    I    see        it,    this  is    not          a 13 question of whether to extend the life of the plant 14 by 20 years but rather a question as to whether to 15 decommission          it  in      2014      or      2034.      And  so        the 16 question is is when would we rather have the jobs 17 provided necessary to decommission this plant and 18 construct a renewable source, or at least some other 19 source of electricity whether that's a new nuclear 20 plant or a new coal plant or wind plants.                                And the 21 Congress requires that the operators of this nuclear 22 plant provide $359,000,000 in a trust fund by 2014.
23 24                      That money spent beginning in 2014 to NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701            www.nealrgross.com
 
27 1 provide job decommissioning in this plant would be a 2 boon to the local economy and the 2.4 billion, and 3 there that's really a number off the top of my head 4 there just saying, well, 800 megawatts times three 5 per wind because of the name plate issue, I don't 6 know how familiar you are with wind, but an 800 7 megawatt nuclear plant takes 2400 megawatts of wind 8 to replace it.            So that's roughly $2.4 billion in 9 construction          of  wind      turbines            and  the  associated 10 jobs that come with that construction on top of some 11 300        full time jobs maintaining that wind energy.
12 That would be a significant boon to the state of 13 Iowa and I would encourage the NRC to look at the 14 economic        impact    on      the      state          of replacing        this 15 nuclear plant with wind as distributed around the 16 state.
17                    The third point that I'd like to make 18 has to do with the environmental impact of a severe 19 accident.          And I understand that you also have a 20 safety        review  portion        of    the      process  and  I      also 21 understand that the 9th Circuit Court has ruled that 22 your SEIS must include an analysis of accidents in 23 the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit Court.                                So in 24 lack of ruling from this Circuit Court, I believe NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701            www.nealrgross.com
 
28 1 that that ruling has precedence and I would ask that 2 you include accidents and the impacts of accidents 3 in the SEIS --
4                    Specifically on this point I would refer 5 to the Sandia Lab Study commissioned by the NRC in 6 1982          which  calculated        the      impacts      of    a    severe 7 accident          with  core      damage        estimating        3,000        peak 8 fatalities immediately after the accident within a 9 25 mile radius, and 12,000 radiation injuries in the 10 early          aftermath  of    an    accident            within  a  35      mile 11 radius.              And  calculate            the        plant  operators, 12 calculate          at  any  given        time      if    all  equipment          is 13 operating correctly, that the core damage frequency 14 is one in 3,000,000 per reactor year.                            But sometimes 15 parts are out of operation and the possibility that 16 there's a severe accident under their calculations 17 go up.
18                    I would ask for this SEIS that the NRC 19 address the likelihood of an accident taking into 20 account          more than the plant operators include in 21 their          calculation    of    the      CDF,        particularly      their 22 probablistic risk assessment assumes that all parts 23 operate as though they were new and have not been 24 subjected to problems of radiation exposure, heat NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com
 
29 1 exposure,        fluctuation          of      temperature,        pressure 2 exposure and embrittlement.
3                  In this regard, I'd specifically point 4 out that the CDF excludes vessel failure.                        This is a 5 Mark 1 reactor.          It's one of 18 Mark 1 reactors in 6 the country.          A study published by the Union of 7 Concerned Scientists in 1995 looked at the vessel 8 internals aging in the 18 Mark 1 reactors in the 9 country as a result of discoveries of major fissures 10 and cracks in Mark 1 core shrouds and found that at 11 about          20 years    of      operation            the  exposure          to 12 radiation and heat fluctuation caused moderate or 13 extensive cracking in seven out of the 18 Mark 1 14 reactors.
15                  Duane    Arnold          at        that  time    had        no 16 cracking evident and I would encourage the NRC to 17 consider the possibility that a 40 year license that 18 was initially granted to this reactor has allowed 19 the investors to recoup their losses and that we are 20 lucky today that the aging of the parts has not 21 resulted in an accident.                  But a 20 year extension of 22 the license represents too great a risk to this site 23 specific plan for an accident.
24                  If the core shroud detailed in the UCS NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433              WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701            www.nealrgross.com
 
30 1 report is one of just 21 vessel internal components 2 subject not only to the cracking that is described 3 in that report, but also to erosion, embrittlement, 4 fatigue,          creep,    as      well        as      stress  corrosion 5 cracking.          So if these vessel internal parts were to 6 prevent an insertion of the control rods, then the 7 consequences of an accident could be quite severe.
8                    In addition, the secondary containment 9 which is meant to control the impact and mitigate 10 the impact of such an accident in this particular 11 reactor, was discovered to be faulty in the early 12 days of operation of this reactor and the 17 other 13 reactors like it in the country.
14                    In fact, in 1986 Harold Denton, at that 15 time a Chief Safety Officer with the NRC, in leading 16 a      meeting    of  Mark    1    operators            declared  that        the 17 taurus, as it is known, a million gallon tank of 18 water to suppress heat in the event that the reactor 19 was unable to be shut down and no where for the heat 20 to go because of a loss of connectivity to the grid 21 for          instance,    that      there            was    a  90    percent 22 probability that that taurus would fail at a meeting 23 of Mark 1 operators.
24                    And so as a result of that assessment, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433              WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701            www.nealrgross.com
 
31 1 Mark 1 operators were instructed to install a bypass 2 system        that    instead        of      trying          to  contain          the 3 pressure          from    the        reactor              using    secondary 4 containment,            would          simply              bypass      secondary 5 containment          and  vent      the      taurus        directly    to        the 6 atmosphere through a butterfly valve operated in the 7 control room.          And Duane Arnold officials here today 8 verify that, in fact, that is the situation at Duane 9 Arnold, that it's not different than the other 17 10 Mark 1's.
11                    And I think that I can understand why 12 you would let a plant live out its 40 year operating 13 license knowing that it had a design deficiency off 14 by a factor of 10 in the size of the secondary 15 containment in order to allow investors to recoup 16 their investment.              But to extend the plant's life 17 for        another  20  years        when        a      viable    alternative 18 exists that would be a boon to the state's economy, 19 I      think    is  something        that      should        be  viewed      with 20 skepticism.
21                    Finally,      I  think          that    the  NRC    should 22 look at the history of scrams.                            Every scram at this 23 reactor        significantly          ages        the      components.              It 24 subjects the components to significant changes in NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com
 
32 1 temperature, just like when you take a hot glass and 2 submerge it suddenly in cold water.                          It can shatter 3 parts          inside  a reactor          every        time  you  scram        the 4 reactor          or suddenly subject it from one pressure 5 extreme to another, from one temperature extreme to 6 another and this significantly ages parts.
7                    If the reactor, for instance, had in the 8 non-radiation side, had a metal part break off at a 9 filet weld simply because it had been cycled between 10 hot and cold, and that metal part found its way 11 through the system, scored open a number of tubes.
12 Finally,          the problem was turned up because water 13 leaked first into one part and then overflowed into 14 another part of the plant, and it was only once the 15 plant          was shut down and people investigated that 16 they found tubes slashed open and eventually found 17 the metal part that worked its way loose.                          That sort 18 of risk is simply unnecessary and there's a viable 19 alternative          to  the        nuclear            plant's  continued 20 operation.
21                    The final point that I'd like to make 22 concerning          the  reactor          itself          is  this    plant's 23 specific risk to a terrorist attack.                            The plant is 24 in proximity to the Rockwell Collins plant that used NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433              WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701            www.nealrgross.com
 
33 1 to      be    in  the    Soviet        Union's            top  three    list        of 2 targets because of its role in our nation's nuclear 3 arsenal, missile guidance and intelligence.                                      That 4 means that both an attack on Rockwell Collins would 5 have an impact on the plant, on its safety, on its 6 ability to evacuate and so on.
7                    It also means that there could be an 8 indirect        threat to the plant because a terrorist 9 attack might find the plant a useful target in order 10 to        move    military      protection              away    from    Rockwell 11 Collins        or  the    further        strategic          air  command          in 12 Omaha in order to free up the vulnerability of SEC.
13  So the specific location of this plant represents a 14 hazard          that    needs      to      be      looked      at  from          the 15 perspective of a terrorist attack.
16                    And in addition, the Mark 1 design has a 17 spent fuel pool that's on top of a building that is 18 essentially unprotected, that various studies have 19 concluded that a piece of weaponry that can be moved 20 around        in  the    trunk      of    a    car      and  launched        from 21 somebody's          shoulder,        a    howitzer,          could  penetrate 22 that building and create a fire in the spent fuel 23 pool.          In addition, that spent fuel pool would be 24 committed            to    use        for          five      years      beyond NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com
 
34 1 decommissioning because if we were to decommission 2 the plant even today, then we would need to store 3 the spent fuel for a minimum of five years on that 4 local site.
5                    So we're looking at a terrorist threat, 6 a target, an attractive target for five years beyond 7 decommission and I think it needs to be considered 8 whether in this day and age it's really necessary to 9 continue maintaining such an attractive target.
10                    The final comment I'd like to make has 11 to do with transparency.                      I really do support all 12 your jobs.          I think you all do a magnificent job at 13 Duane Arnold.            I'm not afraid of nuclear power in 14 particular, I mean in general, nor do I think that 15 this plant in particular has a bad safety record.
16 But I do think that there are better alternatives 17 and I support your work to make this plant safe as 18 it continues to operate.
19                    I hope that I don't cause any personal 20 tension with any of you in speaking, and similarly, 21 I think that the representatives here from the NRC 22 today have run a good meeting.                              I think that in 23 general they've made efforts to inform the public at 24 this          meeting,    and      so      in        griping  about        the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701          www.nealrgross.com
 
35 1 transparency          I    hope      that        it's        not  a    personal 2 comment.
3                    But  I    do    notice          that    I'm  the      only 4 speaker registered and I do wonder why that might 5 be, and so for the record I'd like to state that 6 twice a week I've looked at the website that you 7 still have up here on your PowerPoint.                              In fact, I 8 just looked at it in this building's wireless and it 9 says          that  the  date      of      this          meeting  is    to        be 10 determined.          I can show you that after the meeting 11 if you like.
12                    A friend of mine said hey, when is the 13 Duane Arnold thing coming up.                              Are you on top of 14 that?          I said, yeah, I'm on top of it.                          I check 15 every two weeks.            And he said well, I think it might 16 be coming up.          I heard something about that and so I 17 looked on the NRC's website and found, sure enough, 18 it's yet to be determined.                    They haven't announced a 19 date for the SEIS scoping meeting.                                This was on 20 April 16th, by the way.
21                    And I then, just to be darn sure, did a 22 search in the Adams document room to make sure that 23 there was not an announcement of an SEIS scoping 24 meeting and found much to my surprise an April 8th NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com
 
36 1 memo came up in the search from David Pelton to each 2 of      the    two  of  you,      to    Charles        Eccleston      and        to 3 Maurice          Heath,    and    that      in    order      to  register          to 4 speak at this meeting I had to do so by April 16th.
5  Well, I look at my watch and it's 7:00 p.m. on 6 April 16th, so ostensibly I missed the deadline to 7 register to speak for this meeting.
8                      I    immediately            e-mailed        both    of        you 9 following the e-mail address that was given in that 10 April 8th memorandum and those e-mails both bounced 11 back to me.            I'd be happy to show you those e-mails 12 after          the meeting, as being undeliverable by the 13 NRC.          I then left a phone message on both of your 14 phones and got no phone call back, though you did 15 acknowledge          that    you      got      my      phone  call    at        the 16 beginning          of  the    meeting          and      welcomed    me    to      the 17 meeting.
18                      Obviously        from      April      16th  to  now        was 19 sufficient time for me to prepare, more or less, 20 though I must say that one of the people I had hoped 21 to talk to before this meeting from the Union of 22 Concerned          Scientists        was      out        of  the  country          and 23 unavailable.              So    as    a    result        of  the  lack          of 24 transparency I'm not as prepared as I would have NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                  WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com
 
37 1 liked to be and I can only guess who else might have 2 shown            up    had    the        meeting            been  better          in 3 transparency.
4                      And so I thank you for your attention 5 and look forward to working with you through the 6 process.
7                      MR. ECCLESTON:          Thank you.
8                      MR. HEATH:            All right, thank you for 9 your          comment.      Now,        I    have        one  other    person 10 registered,            Mr. Bruce Richardson, I believe.                              Is 11 that correct?
12                      MR. RICHARDSON:                No    comments  at      this 13 time.
14                      MR. HEATH:            No comment, okay.                Well, 15 like        we    said  before,      you      can      still  submit      your 16 comments other ways after the meeting up until May 17 25th.
18                      Do we have anybody else that would like 19 to provide comments at this time?
20                                      (No response.)
21                      Okay. Well, with that, thank you all 22 for coming to this meeting.                            We will adjourn this 23 meeting.            We will be having another meeting between 24 7:00        and    10:00  upstairs          in      the    community    center NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701            www.nealrgross.com
 
38 1 room, so if you'd like to stick around or come back, 2 we'll be here this evening.              Thank you for coming.
3                (Whereupon the above matter concluded 4 at 2:27 p.m.)
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433         WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701      www.nealrgross.com


NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
39 1
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 1  NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2  + + + + +
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
3  Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 4  +  +  +  +  +
(202) 234-4433     WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701  www.nealrgross.com}}
5  DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER 6  Regarding the Renewal of Facility Operating 7  License for a 20-Year Period 8  WEDNESDAY 9  APRIL 22, 2009 10  +  +  +  +  +
11  HIAWATHA CITY HALL 12  101 EMMONS STREET 13  HIAWATHA, IOWA 14  +  +  +  +  +
15  The above-entitled matter commenced 16 pursuant to Notice before Maurice Heath, Project 17 Manager at 101 Emmons Street, Hiawatha, Iowa 52233, 18 on Wednesday, April 22, 2009, at 1:30 p.m.
19 PRESENT: 20 NRC STAFF:
21 Maurice Heath - Project Manager 22 Charles Eccleston 23 Scott Burnell 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 2 Caroline Tilton 1  P R O C E E D I N G S 2  (1:30 P.M.)
3  MR. HEATH:  Good afternoon everybody.
4 Welcome to the meeting. We're going to talk about 5 the Duane Arnold Energy Center license renewal 6 application. My name is Maurice Heath and I'm a 7 Project Manager at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 8 Commission, or NRC as you're going to hear us call 9 it today. And I'll be your facilitator as well, so 10 bear with me with that. And I will also be the 11 first presenter of the afternoon.
12  The purpose of today's meeting is to 13 provide you an opportunity to give your comments on 14 what the environmental issues that the NRC should 15 consider during its review of the Duane Arnold 16 Energy Center license renewal application. The 17 meeting will essentially have two parts. The first 18 we'll have a presentation from NRC staff on the 19 license renewal process and environmental review 20 process.
21  I'm not sure if everybody knows that on 22 the back table we have sign in sheets and we also 23 have a copy of today's presentation if you'd like a 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 3copy. Also in back we have a sign up for anybody 1 who wants to speak during the comment period at the 2 end. We ask that you put your name down, if you 3 didn't already, that's okay, you can still get on 4 and give comments, but please fill it out before you 5 leave just so we can get it on the transcript. We 6 want to make sure that we can accurately have your 7 correct spelling and make sure that everything is 8 all clean on the transcript.
9  So like I said, we have a court reporter 10 here. He will be transcribing the meeting, so when 11 you give a comment we'd ask that you please say your 12 name and spell it for the court reporter. And also, 13 if you have any affiliations, please name your 14 affiliation.
15  One of the items before we get started, 16 we do have NRC comment forms in the back, so if 17 you'd like to comment on how the meeting ran, we 18 would like you to fill that out and you can just 19 send it back to us. You don't have to have any 20 postage on it. You just fill it out and then send 21 it back and it will come actually directly to me, 22 and so we can receive that.
23  Just for your knowledge in case anybody 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 4doesn't know, the restrooms are out the back door 1 and to the left.
2  Now with that, we're just going to go 3 right into our presentation. First, I'd like to 4 introduce Mr. Charles Eccleston. He's a Project 5 Manager as well just like myself, but he's going to 6 talk about the environmental process, environmental 7 scoping. 8  Now, today's meeting will provide an 9 overview of the license renewal process, which 10 includes both the safety and environmental as I said 11 earlier. But the most important thing in the 12 meeting today is that we get the comments that you 13 have on the environmental review. So we'll also 14 give a chance for you to submit any written comments 15 and give it to us as well.
16  At the conclusion of today's 17 presentation, we'll be happy to answer any questions 18 that you have. However, I'm going to have to ask 19 you to limit your participation with questions only 20 at that time where we have another designated time 21 to receive your comments for the record. So once we 22 get all the questions asked, then we'll stop that 23 portion and go directly to the comments if you'd 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 5 like to add your comments to the record.
1  Before I get into the process, I'd like 2 to take a minute to talk about NRC in terms of what 3 we do and what our mission is. The NRC is a federal 4 agency established in the Energy Reorganization Act 5 of 1974 and it regulates the civilian use of nuclear 6 material. The Atomic Energy Act of 1954 authorized 7 the NRC to grant a 40 year license. The 40 year 8 term is based on economic considerations and 9 antitrust factors, not on the safety or technical 10 limitations. The Atomic Energy Act also allows for 11 license renewal.
12  Now, the National Environmental Policy 13 Act of 1969, otherwise known as NEPA, established a 14 national policy that requires federal decision 15 makers to assess and consider impacts and 16 alternatives to a proposal before reaching a final 17 decision to pursue an action. As a matter of 18 policy, the NRC has determined that the reactor 19 license renewal constitutes a major federal action 20 in which we will prepare an Environmental Impact 21 Statement.
22  The NRC's regulations governing nuclear 23 safety, security and environmental protection are 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 6contained in Title 10 of the Code of Federal 1 Regulations, which are referred to as 10 CFR. An 2 exercise in the regulatory authority, the NRC's 3 mission is threefold:  to insure adequate protection 4 of public health and safety; promote the common 5 defense and security; and to protect the 6 environment.
7  The NRC accomplishes its mission through 8 a combination of regulatory programs and processes 9 such as establishing rules and regulations, 10 conducting inspections, issuing enforcement actions, 11 assessing licensee performance, and evaluating 12 operating experience for nuclear plants in this 13 country and internationally.
14  The NRC also has resident inspectors at 15 all operating nuclear plants. The inspectors are 16 considered the eyes and ears of the NRC. They carry 17 out the safety mission on a daily basis and are on 18 the front lines to insuring acceptable safety 19 performance and compliance with regulatory 20 requirements.
21  Now, with Duane Arnold, their current 22 operating license expires February 21st, 2014 and 23 their license renewal was submitted to us on October 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 71st, 2008. A license renewal application is 1 required to contain these elements:  general 2 information such as applicant's name, address, 3 business and administrative information; technical 4 information which pertains to the aging management 5 and this is the focus of the safety review; 6 technical specifications which define the operating 7 parameters of the plant. The application indicates 8 what, if any, changes or additions to the technical 9 specifications are necessary to manage the effect of 10 the aging during the period of extended operation.
11  And last but not least in the 12 application is the Environmental Report, which is 13 the applicant's assessment of the environmental 14 impacts of continued operation. This information 15 serves as a starting point for the environmental 16 review. 17  The license renewal process involves two 18 parallel reviews as I mentioned, the safety aspect 19 and the environmental aspect. Now, the safety 20 review focuses on aging effects of passive and long 21 lived components and structures that the NRC deems 22 important to plant safety. The staff's main 23 objective is to determine whether the effects of 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 8aging will be adequately managed by the applicant.
1 The review also considers generic and site-specific 2 operating experience related to the effects of 3 aging. The results of the safety review are 4 documented in the Safety Evaluation Report, or as we 5 call it, SER.
6  For the environmental review, the NRC 7 evaluates environmental impacts of continued plant 8 operations for an additional 20 years. The NRC 9 prepares an Environmental Impact Statement, 10 otherwise known as the EIS, which is publicly 11 available and discloses these impacts.
12  The EIS also evaluates impacts of other 13 reasonable alternatives to license renewal. The 14 public is afforded an opportunity to provide 15 comments and input which help shape the scope of the 16 EIS analysis. The public is also afforded the 17 opportunity to comment on the accuracy of the draft 18 EIS. The goal is to provide the decision makers 19 with sufficient environmental information so they 20 can make a reasoned choice between the proposed 21 license renewal action and reasonable alternatives.
22  Now, I'd like to mention a few things 23 that come up in public meetings but they are usually 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 9outside the scope of license renewal. However, 1 these items are dealt with in an ongoing regulatory 2 oversight and they are emergency planning, security 3 and current safety performance as defined by the NRC 4 inspection findings, violations, general assessment 5 and planning. For specifically at Duane Arnold, the 6 link below, which is also in your handouts, is the 7 location where you can find the performance of the 8 Duane Arnold Energy Center.
9  Now, this diagram illustrates the safety 10 and the environmental review processes. It also 11 features two other considerations in the 12 commission's decision of whether or not to renew an 13 operating license. One of these considerations is 14 the independent review performed by the Advisory 15 Committee on Reactor Safeguards, or ACRS.
16 Statutorily mandated by the Atomic Energy Act of 17 1954, the ACRS is a group of scientists and nuclear 18 safety experts who serve as a consulting body to the 19 commission. The ACRS reviews the license renewal 20 application and the NRC status SER. And the ACRS 21 reports their findings and recommendations directly 22 to the commission.
23  Hearings may also be conducted.
24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  10Interested stakeholders may submit concerns or 1 contentions and request a hearing. An adjudicatory 2 panel from the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 3 will be established to review contentions for 4 admissibility. If a hearing is granted the 5 commission considers the outcome of the hearing 6 process in its decision making for whether or not to 7 issue a renewed operating license.
8  Now, I want to describe the license 9 renewal process in a little more detail. The 10 regulations governing license renewal are based on 11 two guiding principles. To effectively communicate 12 these principles I need to describe a concept used 13 by the NRC. The concept is licensing basis.
14  Now, licensing basis consists of a wide 15 range of design and operational requirements and 16 conditions that must be met for the plant to comply 17 with its operating license. It serves as the basis 18 upon which the NRC originally licensed the plant and 19 to continue to operate, the plant it must conform 20 with its licensing basis.
21  The first principle is that the current 22 regulatory process is adequate to insure that the 23 licensing basis for all operating plants provide and 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  11maintain an acceptable level of safety. The second 1 principle is that the current plant's extending 2 licensing basis must be maintained during the 3 renewal term in the same manner and to the same 4 extent as during the original license term. In 5 other words, the same rules apply that applied under 6 the current license will apply into the renewal 7 term. 8  In addition, a renewed license will 9 include conditions that must be met to insure the 10 aging of structures and components important to 11 safety are adequately managed so that the plant's 12 current licensing basis is maintained during the 13 period of extended operation.
14  The safety review is a very rigorous 15 review. The staff reviews the applicant's license 16 renewal application and supporting documentation.
17 Now, this review includes an evaluation of new and 18 existing programs and surveillance activities to 19 determine with reasonable assurance that the effects 20 of aging for certain plant structures and components 21 will be adequately managed or monitored.
22  The safety review also includes site 23 audits to verify the technical basis of the license 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  12renewal application and to confirm that the 1 applicant's aging management programs and activities 2 conform with how they are described in the 3 application. The staff documents the basis and 4 conclusions of its review in the SER which is 5 publicly available. In addition, a team of 6 specialized inspectors travels to the reactor site 7 to verify the aging management programs have been 8 implemented, modified or planned consistent with the 9 license renewal application.
10  Finally, I'll mention the ACRS performs 11 an independent review of the license renewal 12 application and SER and makes a recommendation to 13 the commission.
14  Next, I'll turn it over to Charles so he 15 can go over the environmental review and the scoping 16 process. 17  MR. ECCLESTON:  Hello. I am the 18 Environmental Project Manager for this proposal and 19 we're now going to turn the lecture over to a review 20 of the environmental process that we're undertaking 21 for this particular project.
22  In 1969 the U.S. Congress passed what 23 has become a very historic and very important act.
24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  13It was the National Environmental Policy Act of 1 1969. It's of such historical significance that now 2 over 100 nations around the world have basically 3 passed an act similar to our original NEPA.
4  NEPA is basically important for two 5 different aspects. First of all, it establishes the 6 basic national environmental policy or the national 7 environmental charter for the entire United States.
8  It was the first major environmental legislation to 9 ever pass -- legislation to ever pass in the United 10 States. Following NEPA, virtually every other law 11 and regulation that we have dealing with NEPA came 12 after the event in its footsteps and it is designed 13 to implement the policy that NEPA set up. So it's 14 important from that perspective, but probably even 15 more so under NEPA it requires that an Environmental 16 Impact Statement be prepared for all major federal 17 actions significantly affecting the quality of the 18 human environment.
19  Now, the NRC has come out and basically 20 said that license renewal projects are projects that 21 need an EIS, so that's why we're here today. I'd 22 like to also point out something, another interest 23 here. According to NEPA, you must follow an 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  14objective interdiscip linary and systematic process 1 in preparing the EIS.
2  Now, let's see why that's important. It 3 has to be an objective process. They have to be 4 able to stand up to scientific scrutiny. There is 5 no room for bias in this analysis. It has to be 6 interdisciplinary. NEPA touches virtually every 7 discipline that somebody could think of from 8 biology, geology, hydrology, economics, sociology.
9 It brings all these disciplines together and these 10 experts in these disciplines prepare the analysis 11 that goes into the EIS. And it's systematic. And 12 by that it means that the agency must follow a very 13 systematic structured process. It's not a wishy 14 washy process. It has to be a very well thought 15 out, very systematic, very structured process in 16 preparing the EIS. So it's important from that 17 standpoint.
18  Under NEPA the EIS must rigorously 19 investigate environmental impacts of the license 20 renewal project and its alternatives. The purpose 21 of the EIS is to inform federal decision makers and 22 to publicly disclose the impacts of the proposal and 23 the reasonable alternatives, including the 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  15 alternative of taking no action at all, which in 1 this case would be not renewing the license for the 2 Duane Arnold Energy Center. Those have to be 3 evaluated.
4  Here is a simplified schematic of a 5 basic EIS process. It's actually in reality quite a 6 bit more complicated than this, but this shows the 7 basic most important aspects of preparing the EIS.
8 Note that the yellow blocks here is where the public 9 has the opportunity to become involved in the 10 process, provide comments, provide input, review the 11 documents and basically get engaged in the process.
12  NEPA is a very open process.
13  Now, the EIS process starts with 14 issuance of a Notice of Intent. That's an NOI.
15 That kicks the EIS process off. Once the NOI is 16 published in the Federal Register, we begin a public 17 scoping process, right here, and included in that 18 public scoping process is a public scoping meeting, 19 which is why we're here today. This is it.
20  The purpose of the scoping process is to 21 solicit public comments and public input in terms of 22 what the public views as important in terms of 23 shaping the scope of the EIS that will be prepared.
24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  16 So the public has, and that's what we're, like I 1 said, that's what we're here today to do. And then 2 until May 25th, that's what we're going to be doing 3 is interacting with the public, trying to find out 4 what the public thinks is important to put into this 5 EIS. 6  Once we determine the scope of the EIS, 7 then we move down and we prepare a draft 8 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, and 9 I'll explain what I mean by supplemental. Don't get 10 hung up on that right now. I'll explain that in a 11 couple of slides as to why they're saying it's a 12 supplemental EIS.
13  But we prepare the supplemental EIS and 14 then after we prepare it, we issue it to the public.
15  It's publicly issued. The public has the ability 16 to take a look at the EIS and provide comments and 17 feedback. If they don't agree with the conclusions 18 in the EIS or if they don't agree, or if they think 19 it's not adequate or didn't cover something, that's 20 the public's opportunity to provide input. That 21 input is addressed by the NRC and the input is used 22 to prepare the final EIS.
23  The final EIS is again sent back out.
24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  17It's publicly issued. Again, the public has an 1 opportunity to review that final EIS and basically 2 see what it says. And then from that point the 3 agency, in this case the NRC, publishes a Record of 4 Decision, or ROD. That is where the agency using 5 the EIS and other factors that they believe is 6 important in reaching the decision, that is where 7 they document that in a publicly available ROD, so 8 the public can see what the decision is. And only 9 then can the agency do any action or anything in 10 terms of or related to the proposal to re-license 11 the Duane Arnold Energy Center.
12  I think the most important thing here 13 that I want to put out there is this is a very 14 systematic process. A lot of steps go through this 15 and no decision, no decision at all regarding the 16 proposal can be made until we reach this step at the 17 end of the process. And no action with respect to 18 re-issuing the license or denying the license, for 19 that matter, or any other alternative that the NRC 20 might choose to do, can be taken until we've gone 21 through this entire process.
22  The purpose of this meeting, and I think 23 this is really important because sometimes people 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  18get the wrong idea about the public scoping meeting, 1 the purpose of this meeting is not to make a 2 decision regarding the proposal for a prospective 3 license renewal. Instead, the purpose is to solicit 4 public input, public comment regarding the scope of 5 the EIS. And again, I want to emphasize that EIS 6 will then be used once it's done, gone through 7 public review, and making the final decision 8 regarding the renewal of license application.
9  So what we are particularly interested 10 in in this meeting and during the entire public 11 scoping process, which will run through May 25th, is 12 determining what the public believes is the scope of 13 actions they want to see in the EIS. What is the 14 scope of the basic impacts and issues they want to 15 see evaluated in the EIS, and what are the 16 particular alternative and mitigation measures that 17 they want to see in the EIS. This is basically what 18 we're trying to pan in on at today's meeting here.
19  I think it's important just to take a 20 moment and talk about this GEIS and this SEIS. Back 21 in 1998, the NRC was doing re-licensing projects and 22 they decided that what they wanted to do was look at 23 all the licensing projects that are worked on and 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  19 try to get a common set of impacts that they could 1 make common conclusions about that would be 2 applicable to all re-licensing projects. They found 3 69 different impacts where they could make basically 4 general conclusions that would be applicable to any 5 kind of re-licensing project. The put it into this 6 GEIS, this Generic EIS.
7  What we are preparing for the Duane 8 Arnold is a Site-Specific Supplemental EIS, and we 9 say supplemental because it's supplementing the 10 conclusions that were printed to the Generic EIS.
11 And the NRC will basically be looking at evaluating 12 any new or significant information concerning the 13 general conclusions reached in the GEIS. So this is 14 how these two EIS's interface and interrelate with 15 one another.
16  Now, in addition to the scoping process 17 and the scoping meeting that we're having today, in 18 addition to that, to supplement that the NRC also 19 goes out and consults with federal, state and local 20 agencies. And examples of this would be like the 21 Fish and Wildlife Service, the National 22 Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, the 23 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, as well native 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  20American tribes that could be potentially affected 1 by this project.
2  We go out and consult with them and then 3 along with, or the input we receive from these 4 consultations and scoping comments that we're 5 receiving, like from the meeting today, we take all 6 that stuff and that is used to determine the focus 7 of what's going to be going into that EIS.
8  In this case, it's been very common that 9 we're going to be looking at impacts to just a 10 diverse array of different kinds of impacts and 11 issues that affect people and the environment, 12 everything from fish and wildlife impacts to air and 13 water resource impacts, impacts to historical and 14 cultural resources, human health impacts, land use 15 impacts. And then there's also social economic 16 impacts, which are often very important to the local 17 citizens in a project like that.
18  And in terms of the social economic 19 impacts we're going to be looking at the impact on 20 taxes, community development, social impacts, 21 environmental justice impacts, and then a host of 22 other impacts or issues that we feel is important in 23 weighing the final decision as to which action we 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  21 want to take.
1  So what we're basically asking here is 2 to get input. What are the common issues that you 3 believe the EIS should focus on?  What are the local 4 environmental impacts or issues that should be 5 examined in the EIS?  What reasonable alternatives 6 or mitigation measures are appropriate for this 7 area?  That's the kind of input we're trying to 8 receive from this scoping meeting.
9  This basically is important because the 10 entire process is a decision making process. And 11 this shows how everything comes together to reach an 12 ultimate decision. Here we are, right up here at 13 the top, we're in this area right here. We're 14 trying to determine the scope of the EIS. Once we 15 determine the scope of the EIS, that will be the 16 entry to the preparation of the Supplemental 17 Environmental Impact Statement.
18  And once the Supplemental Environmental 19 Impact Statement is complete, the conclusions and 20 the information will be used by NRC in making a 21 decision about the license renewal. But that's not 22 the only things or factors that lead into the 23 decision. That's a key principle part of it, but in 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  22 addition to that as Maurice was talking about, 1 there's going to be a very rigorous Safety 2 Evaluation Report. The information from that will 3 feed into the decision.
4  We have regional and planned 5 inspections. Information from that will feed into 6 the decision. The license renewal application that 7 was prepared by the applicant will provide 8 information that will lead into the final decision.
9  We also have an independent Advisory Committee on 10 Reactor Safeguards that will provide information, 11 possibly recommendations which again, feed into the 12 final decision. All this information is coming 13 together to help and assist the NRC in making the 14 wisest possible decision, the most informed decision 15 possible.
16  So in addition to receiving comments 17 here at the scoping meeting, there's three other 18 ways you can provide comments to us, and this is in 19 your handout. You can provide it by mail. The 20 address is in your handout. You can provide 21 comments by e-mail, this e-mail address there. If 22 you happen to be in the Washington, D.C. area 23 walking down the street, you can stop into the NRC 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 23office and hand deliver comments right there.
1 Comments should be submitted by May 25th of this 2 year. 3  This is a table, a matrix of some of the 4 key dates on the EIS schedule that you may or may 5 not find important or they might affect how you want 6 to interface into the process. I'm not going to 7 belabor on this table. It's in your packet, but 8 there are the dates if you have any questions about 9 the dates.
10  Finally, additional information. If you 11 want additional information you can contact Maurice 12 Heath at this number here. Again, it's in your 13 handout, or myself at this number. We have also put 14 pertinent files, pertinent manuals and documents on 15 file with the Hiawatha Public Library. You can go 16 there. And pertinent documents will also be put 17 onto the NRC's website. So there's an area if you 18 want to get more information about this proposal, 19 there's where you go.
20  And with that, I guess I'll turn it back 21 over to you, Maurice.
22  MR. HEATH:  Thank you. Now, with that 23 I'd like to open it up. Does anybody have any 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 24 questions they would like to ask?
1    (No response.)
2  One thing to note, if you do have 3 questions or maybe you come up with questions later, 4 we have this, what we call FAQ, Frequently Asked 5 Questions. It's on the side table. It will be to 6 your left over there.
7  There's a few copies. I'll describe 8 one. It's full of questions and answers that we 9 usually get, typically get at some of these scoping 10 meetings. So just grab one on your way out just for 11 reading material if you want. And if you run out, 12 please just let me know so I can get an address and 13 get you a copy of it.
14  Well, if we don't have any questions 15 then we'll move on to the comment period. We have 16 one speaker here registered to speak.
17  MR. BROWN:  I'm the only one?
18  MR. HEATH:  Yes, so far, and if anybody 19 else does, I still ask for you to sign the list and 20 after Mr. Brown is finished, actually can you speak 21 into the microphone?  First just state your name and 22 spell it. And also for the scoping comment period, 23 we usually ask to just bear with no more than 10 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  25minutes for your comments just in case we do have 1 somebody else that changes their mind and wants to 2 speak. Thank you, go ahead.
3  MR. BROWN:  Thanks. My name is Bennett 4 Brown, B-e-n-n-e-t-t, last name is Brown, like the 5 color. I live in Iowa City. I teach high school 6 physics in Solon. I studied physics at MIT. I've 7 worked in a reactor briefly, and I'm not afraid of 8 nuclear reactors but I don't feel that this 9 particular one should be renewed. I do acknowledge 10 it's got an excellent staff and I support your jobs, 11 and I think that the money spent at the reactor on 12 employment could be better spent with a better 13 source of energy and I'd like to mention what I'd 14 like to see the SEIS include in terms of impacts and 15 alternatives.
16  Specifically, the Department of Natural 17 Resources and the state of Iowa assessed the state's 18 wind resource and concluded that the state of Iowa 19 developing only class 4 jacobs sites. These are 20 currently developable at two and-a-half cents a 21 kilowatt hour, would produce six times as much 22 electricity as needed by the state of Iowa.
23  The Midwest Independent Systems 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  26Operators as well as other utility grid operators 1 have studied how much wind penetration the grid 2 could sustain given the variability of the wind and 3 concluded that we could provide 15 to 25 percent of 4 our electricity from wind without any alterations in 5 the existing grid. So the percentage of electricity 6 produced in the state of Iowa from Duane Arnold 7 could easily be replaced by wind turbines with 8 existing technology and existing market support.
9  The second thing that I'd like to see 10 that the SEIS addresses is the effect on employment 11 decommissioning. As I see it, this is not a 12 question of whether to extend the life of the plant 13 by 20 years but rather a question as to whether to 14 decommission it in 2014 or 2034. And so the 15 question is is when would we rather have the jobs 16 provided necessary to decommission this plant and 17 construct a renewable source, or at least some other 18 source of electricity whether that's a new nuclear 19 plant or a new coal plant or wind plants. And the 20 Congress requires that the operators of this nuclear 21 plant provide $359,000,000 in a trust fund by 2014.
22  23  That money spent beginning in 2014 to 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  27provide job decommissioning in this plant would be a 1 boon to the local economy and the 2.4 billion, and 2 there that's really a number off the top of my head 3 there just saying, well, 800 megawatts times three 4 per wind because of the name plate issue, I don't 5 know how familiar you are with wind, but an 800 6 megawatt nuclear plant takes 2400 megawatts of wind 7 to replace it. So that's roughly $2.4 billion in 8 construction of wind turbines and the associated 9 jobs that come with that construction on top of some 10 300 full time jobs maintaining that wind energy.
11 That would be a significant boon to the state of 12 Iowa and I would encourage the NRC to look at the 13 economic impact on the state of replacing this 14 nuclear plant with wind as distributed around the 15 state. 16  The third point that I'd like to make 17 has to do with the environmental impact of a severe 18 accident. And I understand that you also have a 19 safety review portion of the process and I also 20 understand that the 9th Circuit Court has ruled that 21 your SEIS must include an analysis of accidents in 22 the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit Court. So in 23 lack of ruling from this Circuit Court, I believe 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  28that that ruling has precedence and I would ask that 1 you include accidents and the impacts of accidents 2 in the SEIS --
3  Specifically on this point I would refer 4 to the Sandia Lab Study commissioned by the NRC in 5 1982 which calculated the impacts of a severe 6 accident with core damage estimating 3,000 peak 7 fatalities immediately after the accident within a 8 25 mile radius, and 12,000 radiation injuries in the 9 early aftermath of an accident within a 35 mile 10 radius. And calculate the plant operators, 11 calculate at any given time if all equipment is 12 operating correctly, that the core damage frequency 13 is one in 3,000,000 per reactor year. But sometimes 14 parts are out of operation and the possibility that 15 there's a severe accident under their calculations 16 go up. 17  I would ask for this SEIS that the NRC 18 address the likelihood of an accident taking into 19 account more than the plant operators include in 20 their calculation of the CDF, particularly their 21 probablistic risk assessment assumes that all parts 22 operate as though they were new and have not been 23 subjected to problems of radiation exposure, heat 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  29exposure, fluctuation of temperature, pressure 1 exposure and embrittlement.
2  In this regard, I'd specifically point 3 out that the CDF excludes vessel failure. This is a 4 Mark 1 reactor. It's one of 18 Mark 1 reactors in 5 the country. A study published by the Union of 6 Concerned Scientists in 1995 looked at the vessel 7 internals aging in the 18 Mark 1 reactors in the 8 country as a result of discoveries of major fissures 9 and cracks in Mark 1 core shrouds and found that at 10 about 20 years of operation the exposure to 11 radiation and heat fluctuation caused moderate or 12 extensive cracking in seven out of the 18 Mark 1 13 reactors.
14  Duane Arnold at that time had no 15 cracking evident and I would encourage the NRC to 16 consider the possibility that a 40 year license that 17 was initially granted to this reactor has allowed 18 the investors to recoup their losses and that we are 19 lucky today that the aging of the parts has not 20 resulted in an accident. But a 20 year extension of 21 the license represents too great a risk to this site 22 specific plan for an accident.
23  If the core shroud detailed in the UCS 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  30report is one of just 21 vessel internal components 1 subject not only to the cracking that is described 2 in that report, but also to erosion, embrittlement, 3 fatigue, creep, as well as stress corrosion 4 cracking. So if these vessel internal parts were to 5 prevent an insertion of the control rods, then the 6 consequences of an accident could be quite severe.
7  In addition, the secondary containment 8 which is meant to control the impact and mitigate 9 the impact of such an accident in this particular 10 reactor, was discovered to be faulty in the early 11 days of operation of this reactor and the 17 other 12 reactors like it in the country.
13  In fact, in 1986 Harold Denton, at that 14 time a Chief Safety Officer with the NRC, in leading 15 a meeting of Mark 1 operators declared that the 16 taurus, as it is known, a million gallon tank of 17 water to suppress heat in the event that the reactor 18 was unable to be shut down and no where for the heat 19 to go because of a loss of connectivity to the grid 20 for instance, that there was a 90 percent 21 probability that that taurus would fail at a meeting 22 of Mark 1 operators.
23  And so as a result of that assessment, 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  31Mark 1 operators were instructed to install a bypass 1 system that instead of trying to contain the 2 pressure from the reactor using secondary 3 containment, would simply bypass secondary 4 containment and vent the taurus directly to the 5 atmosphere through a butterfly valve operated in the 6 control room. And Duane Arnold officials here today 7 verify that, in fact, that is the situation at Duane 8 Arnold, that it's not different than the other 17 9 Mark 1's.
10  And I think that I can understand why 11 you would let a plant live out its 40 year operating 12 license knowing that it had a design deficiency off 13 by a factor of 10 in the size of the secondary 14 containment in order to allow investors to recoup 15 their investment. But to extend the plant's life 16 for another 20 years when a viable alternative 17 exists that would be a boon to the state's economy, 18 I think is something that should be viewed with 19 skepticism.
20  Finally, I think that the NRC should 21 look at the history of scrams. Every scram at this 22 reactor significantly ages the components. It 23 subjects the components to significant changes in 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  32temperature, just like when you take a hot glass and 1 submerge it suddenly in cold water. It can shatter 2 parts inside a reactor every time you scram the 3 reactor or suddenly subject it from one pressure 4 extreme to another, from one temperature extreme to 5 another and this significantly ages parts.
6  If the reactor, for instance, had in the 7 non-radiation side, had a metal part break off at a 8 filet weld simply because it had been cycled between 9 hot and cold, and that metal part found its way 10 through the system, scored open a number of tubes.
11 Finally, the problem was turned up because water 12 leaked first into one part and then overflowed into 13 another part of the plant, and it was only once the 14 plant was shut down and people investigated that 15 they found tubes slashed open and eventually found 16 the metal part that worked its way loose. That sort 17 of risk is simply unnecessary and there's a viable 18 alternative to the nuclear plant's continued 19 operation.
20  The final point that I'd like to make 21 concerning the reactor itself is this plant's 22 specific risk to a terrorist attack. The plant is 23 in proximity to the Rockwell Collins plant that used 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  33to be in the Soviet Union's top three list of 1 targets because of its role in our nation's nuclear 2 arsenal, missile guidance and intelligence. That 3 means that both an attack on Rockwell Collins would 4 have an impact on the plant, on its safety, on its 5 ability to evacuate and so on.
6  It also means that there could be an 7 indirect threat to the plant because a terrorist 8 attack might find the plant a useful target in order 9 to move military protection away from Rockwell 10 Collins or the further strategic air command in 11 Omaha in order to free up the vulnerability of SEC.
12  So the specific location of this plant represents a 13 hazard that needs to be looked at from the 14 perspective of a terrorist attack.
15  And in addition, the Mark 1 design has a 16 spent fuel pool that's on top of a building that is 17 essentially unprotected, that various studies have 18 concluded that a piece of weaponry that can be moved 19 around in the trunk of a car and launched from 20 somebody's shoulder, a howitzer, could penetrate 21 that building and create a fire in the spent fuel 22 pool. In addition, that spent fuel pool would be 23 committed to use for five years beyond 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  34decommissioning because if we were to decommission 1 the plant even today, then we would need to store 2 the spent fuel for a minimum of five years on that 3 local site.
4  So we're looking at a terrorist threat, 5 a target, an attractive target for five years beyond 6 decommission and I think it needs to be considered 7 whether in this day and age it's really necessary to 8 continue maintaining such an attractive target.
9  The final comment I'd like to make has 10 to do with transparency. I really do support all 11 your jobs. I think you all do a magnificent job at 12 Duane Arnold. I'm not afraid of nuclear power in 13 particular, I mean in general, nor do I think that 14 this plant in particular has a bad safety record.
15 But I do think that there are better alternatives 16 and I support your work to make this plant safe as 17 it continues to operate.
18  I hope that I don't cause any personal 19 tension with any of you in speaking, and similarly, 20 I think that the representatives here from the NRC 21 today have run a good meeting. I think that in 22 general they've made efforts to inform the public at 23 this meeting, and so in griping about the 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  35transparency I hope that it's not a personal 1 comment. 2  But I do notice that I'm the only 3 speaker registered and I do wonder why that might 4 be, and so for the record I'd like to state that 5 twice a week I've looked at the website that you 6 still have up here on your PowerPoint. In fact, I 7 just looked at it in this building's wireless and it 8 says that the date of this meeting is to be 9 determined. I can show you that after the meeting 10 if you like.
11  A friend of mine said hey, when is the 12 Duane Arnold thing coming up. Are you on top of 13 that?  I said, yeah, I'm on top of it. I check 14 every two weeks. And he said well, I think it might 15 be coming up. I heard something about that and so I 16 looked on the NRC's website and found, sure enough, 17 it's yet to be determined. They haven't announced a 18 date for the SEIS scoping meeting. This was on 19 April 16th, by the way.
20  And I then, just to be darn sure, did a 21 search in the Adams document room to make sure that 22 there was not an announcement of an SEIS scoping 23 meeting and found much to my surprise an April 8th 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  36memo came up in the search from David Pelton to each 1 of the two of you, to Charles Eccleston and to 2 Maurice Heath, and that in order to register to 3 speak at this meeting I had to do so by April 16th.
4  Well, I look at my watch and it's 7:00 p.m. on 5 April 16th, so ostensibly I missed the deadline to 6 register to speak for this meeting.
7  I immediately e-mailed both of you 8 following the e-mail address that was given in that 9 April 8th memorandum and those e-mails both bounced 10 back to me. I'd be happy to show you those e-mails 11 after the meeting, as being undeliverable by the 12 NRC. I then left a phone message on both of your 13 phones and got no phone call back, though you did 14 acknowledge that you got my phone call at the 15 beginning of the meeting and welcomed me to the 16 meeting.
17  Obviously from April 16th to now was 18 sufficient time for me to prepare, more or less, 19 though I must say that one of the people I had hoped 20 to talk to before this meeting from the Union of 21 Concerned Scientists was out of the country and 22 unavailable. So as a result of the lack of 23 transparency I'm not as prepared as I would have 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  37liked to be and I can only guess who else might have 1 shown up had the meeting been better in 2 transparency.
3  And so I thank you for your attention 4 and look forward to working with you through the 5 process. 6  MR. ECCLESTON:  Thank you.
7  MR. HEATH:  All right, thank you for 8 your comment. Now, I have one other person 9 registered, Mr. Bruce Richardson, I believe. Is 10 that correct?
11  MR. RICHARDSON:  No comments at this 12 time. 13  MR. HEATH:  No comment, okay. Well, 14 like we said before, you can still submit your 15 comments other ways after the meeting up until May 16 25th. 17  Do we have anybody else that would like 18 to provide comments at this time?
19    (No response.)
20  Okay. Well, with that, thank you all 21 for coming to this meeting. We will adjourn this 22 meeting. We will be having another meeting between 23 7:00 and 10:00 upstairs in the community center 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  38room, so if you'd like to stick around or come back, 1 we'll be here this evening. Thank you for coming.
2  (Whereupon the above matter concluded 3 at 2:27 p.m.)
4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS  1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com  39 1}}

Revision as of 04:23, 14 November 2019

Transcript of Duane Arnold Energy Center Public Meeting: Afternoon Session, Wednesday, April 22, 2009, Pages 1-35
ML091870099
Person / Time
Site: Duane Arnold NextEra Energy icon.png
Issue date: 07/17/2009
From:
License Renewal Projects Branch 1
To:
ECCLESTON C. H. 415-8537, NRR/DLR/RPB1
References
NRC-2777
Download: ML091870099 (40)
v • d • e


Text

Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Title: Duane Arnold Energy Center Public Meeting: Afternoon Session Docket Number: 50-331 Location: Hiawatha, Iowa Date: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 Work Order No.: NRC-2777 Pages 1-35 NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC.

Court Reporters and Transcribers 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 234-4433

1 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 + + + + +

4 Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 5 + + + + +

6 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER 7 Regarding the Renewal of Facility Operating 8 License for a 20-Year Period 9 WEDNESDAY 10 APRIL 22, 2009 11 + + + + +

12 HIAWATHA CITY HALL 13 101 EMMONS STREET 14 HIAWATHA, IOWA 15 + + + + +

16 The above-entitled matter commenced 17 pursuant to Notice before Maurice Heath, Project 18 Manager at 101 Emmons Street, Hiawatha, Iowa 52233, 19 on Wednesday, April 22, 2009, at 1:30 p.m.

20 PRESENT:

21 NRC STAFF:

22 Maurice Heath - Project Manager 23 Charles Eccleston 24 Scott Burnell NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

2 1 Caroline Tilton 2 P R O C E E D I N G S 3 (1:30 P.M.)

4 MR. HEATH: Good afternoon everybody.

5 Welcome to the meeting. We're going to talk about 6 the Duane Arnold Energy Center license renewal 7 application. My name is Maurice Heath and I'm a 8 Project Manager at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 9 Commission, or NRC as you're going to hear us call 10 it today. And I'll be your facilitator as well, so 11 bear with me with that. And I will also be the 12 first presenter of the afternoon.

13 The purpose of today's meeting is to 14 provide you an opportunity to give your comments on 15 what the environmental issues that the NRC should 16 consider during its review of the Duane Arnold 17 Energy Center license renewal application. The 18 meeting will essentially have two parts. The first 19 we'll have a presentation from NRC staff on the 20 license renewal process and environmental review 21 process.

22 I'm not sure if everybody knows that on 23 the back table we have sign in sheets and we also 24 have a copy of today's presentation if you'd like a NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

3 1 copy. Also in back we have a sign up for anybody 2 who wants to speak during the comment period at the 3 end. We ask that you put your name down, if you 4 didn't already, that's okay, you can still get on 5 and give comments, but please fill it out before you 6 leave just so we can get it on the transcript. We 7 want to make sure that we can accurately have your 8 correct spelling and make sure that everything is 9 all clean on the transcript.

10 So like I said, we have a court reporter 11 here. He will be transcribing the meeting, so when 12 you give a comment we'd ask that you please say your 13 name and spell it for the court reporter. And also, 14 if you have any affiliations, please name your 15 affiliation.

16 One of the items before we get started, 17 we do have NRC comment forms in the back, so if 18 you'd like to comment on how the meeting ran, we 19 would like you to fill that out and you can just 20 send it back to us. You don't have to have any 21 postage on it. You just fill it out and then send 22 it back and it will come actually directly to me, 23 and so we can receive that.

24 Just for your knowledge in case anybody NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

4 1 doesn't know, the restrooms are out the back door 2 and to the left.

3 Now with that, we're just going to go 4 right into our presentation. First, I'd like to 5 introduce Mr. Charles Eccleston. He's a Project 6 Manager as well just like myself, but he's going to 7 talk about the environmental process, environmental 8 scoping.

9 Now, today's meeting will provide an 10 overview of the license renewal process, which 11 includes both the safety and environmental as I said 12 earlier. But the most important thing in the 13 meeting today is that we get the comments that you 14 have on the environmental review. So we'll also 15 give a chance for you to submit any written comments 16 and give it to us as well.

17 At the conclusion of today's 18 presentation, we'll be happy to answer any questions 19 that you have. However, I'm going to have to ask 20 you to limit your participation with questions only 21 at that time where we have another designated time 22 to receive your comments for the record. So once we 23 get all the questions asked, then we'll stop that 24 portion and go directly to the comments if you'd NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

5 1 like to add your comments to the record.

2 Before I get into the process, I'd like 3 to take a minute to talk about NRC in terms of what 4 we do and what our mission is. The NRC is a federal 5 agency established in the Energy Reorganization Act 6 of 1974 and it regulates the civilian use of nuclear 7 material. The Atomic Energy Act of 1954 authorized 8 the NRC to grant a 40 year license. The 40 year 9 term is based on economic considerations and 10 antitrust factors, not on the safety or technical 11 limitations. The Atomic Energy Act also allows for 12 license renewal.

13 Now, the National Environmental Policy 14 Act of 1969, otherwise known as NEPA, established a 15 national policy that requires federal decision 16 makers to assess and consider impacts and 17 alternatives to a proposal before reaching a final 18 decision to pursue an action. As a matter of 19 policy, the NRC has determined that the reactor 20 license renewal constitutes a major federal action 21 in which we will prepare an Environmental Impact 22 Statement.

23 The NRC's regulations governing nuclear 24 safety, security and environmental protection are NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

6 1 contained in Title 10 of the Code of Federal 2 Regulations, which are referred to as 10 CFR. An 3 exercise in the regulatory authority, the NRC's 4 mission is threefold: to insure adequate protection 5 of public health and safety; promote the common 6 defense and security; and to protect the 7 environment.

8 The NRC accomplishes its mission through 9 a combination of regulatory programs and processes 10 such as establishing rules and regulations, 11 conducting inspections, issuing enforcement actions, 12 assessing licensee performance, and evaluating 13 operating experience for nuclear plants in this 14 country and internationally.

15 The NRC also has resident inspectors at 16 all operating nuclear plants. The inspectors are 17 considered the eyes and ears of the NRC. They carry 18 out the safety mission on a daily basis and are on 19 the front lines to insuring acceptable safety 20 performance and compliance with regulatory 21 requirements.

22 Now, with Duane Arnold, their current 23 operating license expires February 21st, 2014 and 24 their license renewal was submitted to us on October NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

7 1 1st, 2008. A license renewal application is 2 required to contain these elements: general 3 information such as applicant's name, address, 4 business and administrative information; technical 5 information which pertains to the aging management 6 and this is the focus of the safety review; 7 technical specifications which define the operating 8 parameters of the plant. The application indicates 9 what, if any, changes or additions to the technical 10 specifications are necessary to manage the effect of 11 the aging during the period of extended operation.

12 And last but not least in the 13 application is the Environmental Report, which is 14 the applicant's assessment of the environmental 15 impacts of continued operation. This information 16 serves as a starting point for the environmental 17 review.

18 The license renewal process involves two 19 parallel reviews as I mentioned, the safety aspect 20 and the environmental aspect. Now, the safety 21 review focuses on aging effects of passive and long 22 lived components and structures that the NRC deems 23 important to plant safety. The staff's main 24 objective is to determine whether the effects of NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

8 1 aging will be adequately managed by the applicant.

2 The review also considers generic and site-specific 3 operating experience related to the effects of 4 aging. The results of the safety review are 5 documented in the Safety Evaluation Report, or as we 6 call it, SER.

7 For the environmental review, the NRC 8 evaluates environmental impacts of continued plant 9 operations for an additional 20 years. The NRC 10 prepares an Environmental Impact Statement, 11 otherwise known as the EIS, which is publicly 12 available and discloses these impacts.

13 The EIS also evaluates impacts of other 14 reasonable alternatives to license renewal. The 15 public is afforded an opportunity to provide 16 comments and input which help shape the scope of the 17 EIS analysis. The public is also afforded the 18 opportunity to comment on the accuracy of the draft 19 EIS. The goal is to provide the decision makers 20 with sufficient environmental information so they 21 can make a reasoned choice between the proposed 22 license renewal action and reasonable alternatives.

23 Now, I'd like to mention a few things 24 that come up in public meetings but they are usually NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

9 1 outside the scope of license renewal. However, 2 these items are dealt with in an ongoing regulatory 3 oversight and they are emergency planning, security 4 and current safety performance as defined by the NRC 5 inspection findings, violations, general assessment 6 and planning. For specifically at Duane Arnold, the 7 link below, which is also in your handouts, is the 8 location where you can find the performance of the 9 Duane Arnold Energy Center.

10 Now, this diagram illustrates the safety 11 and the environmental review processes. It also 12 features two other considerations in the 13 commission's decision of whether or not to renew an 14 operating license. One of these considerations is 15 the independent review performed by the Advisory 16 Committee on Reactor Safeguards, or ACRS.

17 Statutorily mandated by the Atomic Energy Act of 18 1954, the ACRS is a group of scientists and nuclear 19 safety experts who serve as a consulting body to the 20 commission. The ACRS reviews the license renewal 21 application and the NRC status SER. And the ACRS 22 reports their findings and recommendations directly 23 to the commission.

24 Hearings may also be conducted.

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

10 1 Interested stakeholders may submit concerns or 2 contentions and request a hearing. An adjudicatory 3 panel from the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 4 will be established to review contentions for 5 admissibility. If a hearing is granted the 6 commission considers the outcome of the hearing 7 process in its decision making for whether or not to 8 issue a renewed operating license.

9 Now, I want to describe the license 10 renewal process in a little more detail. The 11 regulations governing license renewal are based on 12 two guiding principles. To effectively communicate 13 these principles I need to describe a concept used 14 by the NRC. The concept is licensing basis.

15 Now, licensing basis consists of a wide 16 range of design and operational requirements and 17 conditions that must be met for the plant to comply 18 with its operating license. It serves as the basis 19 upon which the NRC originally licensed the plant and 20 to continue to operate, the plant it must conform 21 with its licensing basis.

22 The first principle is that the current 23 regulatory process is adequate to insure that the 24 licensing basis for all operating plants provide and NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

11 1 maintain an acceptable level of safety. The second 2 principle is that the current plant's extending 3 licensing basis must be maintained during the 4 renewal term in the same manner and to the same 5 extent as during the original license term. In 6 other words, the same rules apply that applied under 7 the current license will apply into the renewal 8 term.

9 In addition, a renewed license will 10 include conditions that must be met to insure the 11 aging of structures and components important to 12 safety are adequately managed so that the plant's 13 current licensing basis is maintained during the 14 period of extended operation.

15 The safety review is a very rigorous 16 review. The staff reviews the applicant's license 17 renewal application and supporting documentation.

18 Now, this review includes an evaluation of new and 19 existing programs and surveillance activities to 20 determine with reasonable assurance that the effects 21 of aging for certain plant structures and components 22 will be adequately managed or monitored.

23 The safety review also includes site 24 audits to verify the technical basis of the license NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

12 1 renewal application and to confirm that the 2 applicant's aging management programs and activities 3 conform with how they are described in the 4 application. The staff documents the basis and 5 conclusions of its review in the SER which is 6 publicly available. In addition, a team of 7 specialized inspectors travels to the reactor site 8 to verify the aging management programs have been 9 implemented, modified or planned consistent with the 10 license renewal application.

11 Finally, I'll mention the ACRS performs 12 an independent review of the license renewal 13 application and SER and makes a recommendation to 14 the commission.

15 Next, I'll turn it over to Charles so he 16 can go over the environmental review and the scoping 17 process.

18 MR. ECCLESTON: Hello. I am the 19 Environmental Project Manager for this proposal and 20 we're now going to turn the lecture over to a review 21 of the environmental process that we're undertaking 22 for this particular project.

23 In 1969 the U.S. Congress passed what 24 has become a very historic and very important act.

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

13 1 It was the National Environmental Policy Act of 2 1969. It's of such historical significance that now 3 over 100 nations around the world have basically 4 passed an act similar to our original NEPA.

5 NEPA is basically important for two 6 different aspects. First of all, it establishes the 7 basic national environmental policy or the national 8 environmental charter for the entire United States.

9 It was the first major environmental legislation to 10 ever pass -- legislation to ever pass in the United 11 States. Following NEPA, virtually every other law 12 and regulation that we have dealing with NEPA came 13 after the event in its footsteps and it is designed 14 to implement the policy that NEPA set up. So it's 15 important from that perspective, but probably even 16 more so under NEPA it requires that an Environmental 17 Impact Statement be prepared for all major federal 18 actions significantly affecting the quality of the 19 human environment.

20 Now, the NRC has come out and basically 21 said that license renewal projects are projects that 22 need an EIS, so that's why we're here today. I'd 23 like to also point out something, another interest 24 here. According to NEPA, you must follow an NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

14 1 objective interdiscip linary and systematic process 2 in preparing the EIS.

3 Now, let's see why that's important. It 4 has to be an objective process. They have to be 5 able to stand up to scientific scrutiny. There is 6 no room for bias in this analysis. It has to be 7 interdisciplinary. NEPA touches virtually every 8 discipline that somebody could think of from 9 biology, geology, hydrology, economics, sociology.

10 It brings all these disciplines together and these 11 experts in these disciplines prepare the analysis 12 that goes into the EIS. And it's systematic. And 13 by that it means that the agency must follow a very 14 systematic structured process. It's not a wishy 15 washy process. It has to be a very well thought 16 out, very systematic, very structured process in 17 preparing the EIS. So it's important from that 18 standpoint.

19 Under NEPA the EIS must rigorously 20 investigate environmental impacts of the license 21 renewal project and its alternatives. The purpose 22 of the EIS is to inform federal decision makers and 23 to publicly disclose the impacts of the proposal and 24 the reasonable alternatives, including the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

15 1 alternative of taking no action at all, which in 2 this case would be not renewing the license for the 3 Duane Arnold Energy Center. Those have to be 4 evaluated.

5 Here is a simplified schematic of a 6 basic EIS process. It's actually in reality quite a 7 bit more complicated than this, but this shows the 8 basic most important aspects of preparing the EIS.

9 Note that the yellow blocks here is where the public 10 has the opportunity to become involved in the 11 process, provide comments, provide input, review the 12 documents and basically get engaged in the process.

13 NEPA is a very open process.

14 Now, the EIS process starts with 15 issuance of a Notice of Intent. That's an NOI.

16 That kicks the EIS process off. Once the NOI is 17 published in the Federal Register, we begin a public 18 scoping process, right here, and included in that 19 public scoping process is a public scoping meeting, 20 which is why we're here today. This is it.

21 The purpose of the scoping process is to 22 solicit public comments and public input in terms of 23 what the public views as important in terms of 24 shaping the scope of the EIS that will be prepared.

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

16 1 So the public has, and that's what we're, like I 2 said, that's what we're here today to do. And then 3 until May 25th, that's what we're going to be doing 4 is interacting with the public, trying to find out 5 what the public thinks is important to put into this 6 EIS.

7 Once we determine the scope of the EIS, 8 then we move down and we prepare a draft 9 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, and 10 I'll explain what I mean by supplemental. Don't get 11 hung up on that right now. I'll explain that in a 12 couple of slides as to why they're saying it's a 13 supplemental EIS.

14 But we prepare the supplemental EIS and 15 then after we prepare it, we issue it to the public.

16 It's publicly issued. The public has the ability 17 to take a look at the EIS and provide comments and 18 feedback. If they don't agree with the conclusions 19 in the EIS or if they don't agree, or if they think 20 it's not adequate or didn't cover something, that's 21 the public's opportunity to provide input. That 22 input is addressed by the NRC and the input is used 23 to prepare the final EIS.

24 The final EIS is again sent back out.

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

17 1 It's publicly issued. Again, the public has an 2 opportunity to review that final EIS and basically 3 see what it says. And then from that point the 4 agency, in this case the NRC, publishes a Record of 5 Decision, or ROD. That is where the agency using 6 the EIS and other factors that they believe is 7 important in reaching the decision, that is where 8 they document that in a publicly available ROD, so 9 the public can see what the decision is. And only 10 then can the agency do any action or anything in 11 terms of or related to the proposal to re-license 12 the Duane Arnold Energy Center.

13 I think the most important thing here 14 that I want to put out there is this is a very 15 systematic process. A lot of steps go through this 16 and no decision, no decision at all regarding the 17 proposal can be made until we reach this step at the 18 end of the process. And no action with respect to 19 re-issuing the license or denying the license, for 20 that matter, or any other alternative that the NRC 21 might choose to do, can be taken until we've gone 22 through this entire process.

23 The purpose of this meeting, and I think 24 this is really important because sometimes people NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

18 1 get the wrong idea about the public scoping meeting, 2 the purpose of this meeting is not to make a 3 decision regarding the proposal for a prospective 4 license renewal. Instead, the purpose is to solicit 5 public input, public comment regarding the scope of 6 the EIS. And again, I want to emphasize that EIS 7 will then be used once it's done, gone through 8 public review, and making the final decision 9 regarding the renewal of license application.

10 So what we are particularly interested 11 in in this meeting and during the entire public 12 scoping process, which will run through May 25th, is 13 determining what the public believes is the scope of 14 actions they want to see in the EIS. What is the 15 scope of the basic impacts and issues they want to 16 see evaluated in the EIS, and what are the 17 particular alternative and mitigation measures that 18 they want to see in the EIS. This is basically what 19 we're trying to pan in on at today's meeting here.

20 I think it's important just to take a 21 moment and talk about this GEIS and this SEIS. Back 22 in 1998, the NRC was doing re-licensing projects and 23 they decided that what they wanted to do was look at 24 all the licensing projects that are worked on and NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

19 1 try to get a common set of impacts that they could 2 make common conclusions about that would be 3 applicable to all re-licensing projects. They found 4 69 different impacts where they could make basically 5 general conclusions that would be applicable to any 6 kind of re-licensing project. The put it into this 7 GEIS, this Generic EIS.

8 What we are preparing for the Duane 9 Arnold is a Site-Specific Supplemental EIS, and we 10 say supplemental because it's supplementing the 11 conclusions that were printed to the Generic EIS.

12 And the NRC will basically be looking at evaluating 13 any new or significant information concerning the 14 general conclusions reached in the GEIS. So this is 15 how these two EIS's interface and interrelate with 16 one another.

17 Now, in addition to the scoping process 18 and the scoping meeting that we're having today, in 19 addition to that, to supplement that the NRC also 20 goes out and consults with federal, state and local 21 agencies. And examples of this would be like the 22 Fish and Wildlife Service, the National 23 Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, the 24 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, as well native NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

20 1 American tribes that could be potentially affected 2 by this project.

3 We go out and consult with them and then 4 along with, or the input we receive from these 5 consultations and scoping comments that we're 6 receiving, like from the meeting today, we take all 7 that stuff and that is used to determine the focus 8 of what's going to be going into that EIS.

9 In this case, it's been very common that 10 we're going to be looking at impacts to just a 11 diverse array of different kinds of impacts and 12 issues that affect people and the environment, 13 everything from fish and wildlife impacts to air and 14 water resource impacts, impacts to historical and 15 cultural resources, human health impacts, land use 16 impacts. And then there's also social economic 17 impacts, which are often very important to the local 18 citizens in a project like that.

19 And in terms of the social economic 20 impacts we're going to be looking at the impact on 21 taxes, community development, social impacts, 22 environmental justice impacts, and then a host of 23 other impacts or issues that we feel is important in 24 weighing the final decision as to which action we NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

21 1 want to take.

2 So what we're basically asking here is 3 to get input. What are the common issues that you 4 believe the EIS should focus on? What are the local 5 environmental impacts or issues that should be 6 examined in the EIS? What reasonable alternatives 7 or mitigation measures are appropriate for this 8 area? That's the kind of input we're trying to 9 receive from this scoping meeting.

10 This basically is important because the 11 entire process is a decision making process. And 12 this shows how everything comes together to reach an 13 ultimate decision. Here we are, right up here at 14 the top, we're in this area right here. We're 15 trying to determine the scope of the EIS. Once we 16 determine the scope of the EIS, that will be the 17 entry to the preparation of the Supplemental 18 Environmental Impact Statement.

19 And once the Supplemental Environmental 20 Impact Statement is complete, the conclusions and 21 the information will be used by NRC in making a 22 decision about the license renewal. But that's not 23 the only things or factors that lead into the 24 decision. That's a key principle part of it, but in NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

22 1 addition to that as Maurice was talking about, 2 there's going to be a very rigorous Safety 3 Evaluation Report. The information from that will 4 feed into the decision.

5 We have regional and planned 6 inspections. Information from that will feed into 7 the decision. The license renewal application that 8 was prepared by the applicant will provide 9 information that will lead into the final decision.

10 We also have an independent Advisory Committee on 11 Reactor Safeguards that will provide information, 12 possibly recommendations which again, feed into the 13 final decision. All this information is coming 14 together to help and assist the NRC in making the 15 wisest possible decision, the most informed decision 16 possible.

17 So in addition to receiving comments 18 here at the scoping meeting, there's three other 19 ways you can provide comments to us, and this is in 20 your handout. You can provide it by mail. The 21 address is in your handout. You can provide 22 comments by e-mail, this e-mail address there. If 23 you happen to be in the Washington, D.C. area 24 walking down the street, you can stop into the NRC NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

23 1 office and hand deliver comments right there.

2 Comments should be submitted by May 25th of this 3 year.

4 This is a table, a matrix of some of the 5 key dates on the EIS schedule that you may or may 6 not find important or they might affect how you want 7 to interface into the process. I'm not going to 8 belabor on this table. It's in your packet, but 9 there are the dates if you have any questions about 10 the dates.

11 Finally, additional information. If you 12 want additional information you can contact Maurice 13 Heath at this number here. Again, it's in your 14 handout, or myself at this number. We have also put 15 pertinent files, pertinent manuals and documents on 16 file with the Hiawatha Public Library. You can go 17 there. And pertinent documents will also be put 18 onto the NRC's website. So there's an area if you 19 want to get more information about this proposal, 20 there's where you go.

21 And with that, I guess I'll turn it back 22 over to you, Maurice.

23 MR. HEATH: Thank you. Now, with that 24 I'd like to open it up. Does anybody have any NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

24 1 questions they would like to ask?

2 (No response.)

3 One thing to note, if you do have 4 questions or maybe you come up with questions later, 5 we have this, what we call FAQ, Frequently Asked 6 Questions. It's on the side table. It will be to 7 your left over there.

8 There's a few copies. I'll describe 9 one. It's full of questions and answers that we 10 usually get, typically get at some of these scoping 11 meetings. So just grab one on your way out just for 12 reading material if you want. And if you run out, 13 please just let me know so I can get an address and 14 get you a copy of it.

15 Well, if we don't have any questions 16 then we'll move on to the comment period. We have 17 one speaker here registered to speak.

18 MR. BROWN: I'm the only one?

19 MR. HEATH: Yes, so far, and if anybody 20 else does, I still ask for you to sign the list and 21 after Mr. Brown is finished, actually can you speak 22 into the microphone? First just state your name and 23 spell it. And also for the scoping comment period, 24 we usually ask to just bear with no more than 10 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

25 1 minutes for your comments just in case we do have 2 somebody else that changes their mind and wants to 3 speak. Thank you, go ahead.

4 MR. BROWN: Thanks. My name is Bennett 5 Brown, B-e-n-n-e-t-t, last name is Brown, like the 6 color. I live in Iowa City. I teach high school 7 physics in Solon. I studied physics at MIT. I've 8 worked in a reactor briefly, and I'm not afraid of 9 nuclear reactors but I don't feel that this 10 particular one should be renewed. I do acknowledge 11 it's got an excellent staff and I support your jobs, 12 and I think that the money spent at the reactor on 13 employment could be better spent with a better 14 source of energy and I'd like to mention what I'd 15 like to see the SEIS include in terms of impacts and 16 alternatives.

17 Specifically, the Department of Natural 18 Resources and the state of Iowa assessed the state's 19 wind resource and concluded that the state of Iowa 20 developing only class 4 jacobs sites. These are 21 currently developable at two and-a-half cents a 22 kilowatt hour, would produce six times as much 23 electricity as needed by the state of Iowa.

24 The Midwest Independent Systems NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

26 1 Operators as well as other utility grid operators 2 have studied how much wind penetration the grid 3 could sustain given the variability of the wind and 4 concluded that we could provide 15 to 25 percent of 5 our electricity from wind without any alterations in 6 the existing grid. So the percentage of electricity 7 produced in the state of Iowa from Duane Arnold 8 could easily be replaced by wind turbines with 9 existing technology and existing market support.

10 The second thing that I'd like to see 11 that the SEIS addresses is the effect on employment 12 decommissioning. As I see it, this is not a 13 question of whether to extend the life of the plant 14 by 20 years but rather a question as to whether to 15 decommission it in 2014 or 2034. And so the 16 question is is when would we rather have the jobs 17 provided necessary to decommission this plant and 18 construct a renewable source, or at least some other 19 source of electricity whether that's a new nuclear 20 plant or a new coal plant or wind plants. And the 21 Congress requires that the operators of this nuclear 22 plant provide $359,000,000 in a trust fund by 2014.

23 24 That money spent beginning in 2014 to NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

27 1 provide job decommissioning in this plant would be a 2 boon to the local economy and the 2.4 billion, and 3 there that's really a number off the top of my head 4 there just saying, well, 800 megawatts times three 5 per wind because of the name plate issue, I don't 6 know how familiar you are with wind, but an 800 7 megawatt nuclear plant takes 2400 megawatts of wind 8 to replace it. So that's roughly $2.4 billion in 9 construction of wind turbines and the associated 10 jobs that come with that construction on top of some 11 300 full time jobs maintaining that wind energy.

12 That would be a significant boon to the state of 13 Iowa and I would encourage the NRC to look at the 14 economic impact on the state of replacing this 15 nuclear plant with wind as distributed around the 16 state.

17 The third point that I'd like to make 18 has to do with the environmental impact of a severe 19 accident. And I understand that you also have a 20 safety review portion of the process and I also 21 understand that the 9th Circuit Court has ruled that 22 your SEIS must include an analysis of accidents in 23 the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit Court. So in 24 lack of ruling from this Circuit Court, I believe NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

28 1 that that ruling has precedence and I would ask that 2 you include accidents and the impacts of accidents 3 in the SEIS --

4 Specifically on this point I would refer 5 to the Sandia Lab Study commissioned by the NRC in 6 1982 which calculated the impacts of a severe 7 accident with core damage estimating 3,000 peak 8 fatalities immediately after the accident within a 9 25 mile radius, and 12,000 radiation injuries in the 10 early aftermath of an accident within a 35 mile 11 radius. And calculate the plant operators, 12 calculate at any given time if all equipment is 13 operating correctly, that the core damage frequency 14 is one in 3,000,000 per reactor year. But sometimes 15 parts are out of operation and the possibility that 16 there's a severe accident under their calculations 17 go up.

18 I would ask for this SEIS that the NRC 19 address the likelihood of an accident taking into 20 account more than the plant operators include in 21 their calculation of the CDF, particularly their 22 probablistic risk assessment assumes that all parts 23 operate as though they were new and have not been 24 subjected to problems of radiation exposure, heat NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

29 1 exposure, fluctuation of temperature, pressure 2 exposure and embrittlement.

3 In this regard, I'd specifically point 4 out that the CDF excludes vessel failure. This is a 5 Mark 1 reactor. It's one of 18 Mark 1 reactors in 6 the country. A study published by the Union of 7 Concerned Scientists in 1995 looked at the vessel 8 internals aging in the 18 Mark 1 reactors in the 9 country as a result of discoveries of major fissures 10 and cracks in Mark 1 core shrouds and found that at 11 about 20 years of operation the exposure to 12 radiation and heat fluctuation caused moderate or 13 extensive cracking in seven out of the 18 Mark 1 14 reactors.

15 Duane Arnold at that time had no 16 cracking evident and I would encourage the NRC to 17 consider the possibility that a 40 year license that 18 was initially granted to this reactor has allowed 19 the investors to recoup their losses and that we are 20 lucky today that the aging of the parts has not 21 resulted in an accident. But a 20 year extension of 22 the license represents too great a risk to this site 23 specific plan for an accident.

24 If the core shroud detailed in the UCS NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

30 1 report is one of just 21 vessel internal components 2 subject not only to the cracking that is described 3 in that report, but also to erosion, embrittlement, 4 fatigue, creep, as well as stress corrosion 5 cracking. So if these vessel internal parts were to 6 prevent an insertion of the control rods, then the 7 consequences of an accident could be quite severe.

8 In addition, the secondary containment 9 which is meant to control the impact and mitigate 10 the impact of such an accident in this particular 11 reactor, was discovered to be faulty in the early 12 days of operation of this reactor and the 17 other 13 reactors like it in the country.

14 In fact, in 1986 Harold Denton, at that 15 time a Chief Safety Officer with the NRC, in leading 16 a meeting of Mark 1 operators declared that the 17 taurus, as it is known, a million gallon tank of 18 water to suppress heat in the event that the reactor 19 was unable to be shut down and no where for the heat 20 to go because of a loss of connectivity to the grid 21 for instance, that there was a 90 percent 22 probability that that taurus would fail at a meeting 23 of Mark 1 operators.

24 And so as a result of that assessment, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

31 1 Mark 1 operators were instructed to install a bypass 2 system that instead of trying to contain the 3 pressure from the reactor using secondary 4 containment, would simply bypass secondary 5 containment and vent the taurus directly to the 6 atmosphere through a butterfly valve operated in the 7 control room. And Duane Arnold officials here today 8 verify that, in fact, that is the situation at Duane 9 Arnold, that it's not different than the other 17 10 Mark 1's.

11 And I think that I can understand why 12 you would let a plant live out its 40 year operating 13 license knowing that it had a design deficiency off 14 by a factor of 10 in the size of the secondary 15 containment in order to allow investors to recoup 16 their investment. But to extend the plant's life 17 for another 20 years when a viable alternative 18 exists that would be a boon to the state's economy, 19 I think is something that should be viewed with 20 skepticism.

21 Finally, I think that the NRC should 22 look at the history of scrams. Every scram at this 23 reactor significantly ages the components. It 24 subjects the components to significant changes in NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

32 1 temperature, just like when you take a hot glass and 2 submerge it suddenly in cold water. It can shatter 3 parts inside a reactor every time you scram the 4 reactor or suddenly subject it from one pressure 5 extreme to another, from one temperature extreme to 6 another and this significantly ages parts.

7 If the reactor, for instance, had in the 8 non-radiation side, had a metal part break off at a 9 filet weld simply because it had been cycled between 10 hot and cold, and that metal part found its way 11 through the system, scored open a number of tubes.

12 Finally, the problem was turned up because water 13 leaked first into one part and then overflowed into 14 another part of the plant, and it was only once the 15 plant was shut down and people investigated that 16 they found tubes slashed open and eventually found 17 the metal part that worked its way loose. That sort 18 of risk is simply unnecessary and there's a viable 19 alternative to the nuclear plant's continued 20 operation.

21 The final point that I'd like to make 22 concerning the reactor itself is this plant's 23 specific risk to a terrorist attack. The plant is 24 in proximity to the Rockwell Collins plant that used NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

33 1 to be in the Soviet Union's top three list of 2 targets because of its role in our nation's nuclear 3 arsenal, missile guidance and intelligence. That 4 means that both an attack on Rockwell Collins would 5 have an impact on the plant, on its safety, on its 6 ability to evacuate and so on.

7 It also means that there could be an 8 indirect threat to the plant because a terrorist 9 attack might find the plant a useful target in order 10 to move military protection away from Rockwell 11 Collins or the further strategic air command in 12 Omaha in order to free up the vulnerability of SEC.

13 So the specific location of this plant represents a 14 hazard that needs to be looked at from the 15 perspective of a terrorist attack.

16 And in addition, the Mark 1 design has a 17 spent fuel pool that's on top of a building that is 18 essentially unprotected, that various studies have 19 concluded that a piece of weaponry that can be moved 20 around in the trunk of a car and launched from 21 somebody's shoulder, a howitzer, could penetrate 22 that building and create a fire in the spent fuel 23 pool. In addition, that spent fuel pool would be 24 committed to use for five years beyond NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

34 1 decommissioning because if we were to decommission 2 the plant even today, then we would need to store 3 the spent fuel for a minimum of five years on that 4 local site.

5 So we're looking at a terrorist threat, 6 a target, an attractive target for five years beyond 7 decommission and I think it needs to be considered 8 whether in this day and age it's really necessary to 9 continue maintaining such an attractive target.

10 The final comment I'd like to make has 11 to do with transparency. I really do support all 12 your jobs. I think you all do a magnificent job at 13 Duane Arnold. I'm not afraid of nuclear power in 14 particular, I mean in general, nor do I think that 15 this plant in particular has a bad safety record.

16 But I do think that there are better alternatives 17 and I support your work to make this plant safe as 18 it continues to operate.

19 I hope that I don't cause any personal 20 tension with any of you in speaking, and similarly, 21 I think that the representatives here from the NRC 22 today have run a good meeting. I think that in 23 general they've made efforts to inform the public at 24 this meeting, and so in griping about the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

35 1 transparency I hope that it's not a personal 2 comment.

3 But I do notice that I'm the only 4 speaker registered and I do wonder why that might 5 be, and so for the record I'd like to state that 6 twice a week I've looked at the website that you 7 still have up here on your PowerPoint. In fact, I 8 just looked at it in this building's wireless and it 9 says that the date of this meeting is to be 10 determined. I can show you that after the meeting 11 if you like.

12 A friend of mine said hey, when is the 13 Duane Arnold thing coming up. Are you on top of 14 that? I said, yeah, I'm on top of it. I check 15 every two weeks. And he said well, I think it might 16 be coming up. I heard something about that and so I 17 looked on the NRC's website and found, sure enough, 18 it's yet to be determined. They haven't announced a 19 date for the SEIS scoping meeting. This was on 20 April 16th, by the way.

21 And I then, just to be darn sure, did a 22 search in the Adams document room to make sure that 23 there was not an announcement of an SEIS scoping 24 meeting and found much to my surprise an April 8th NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

36 1 memo came up in the search from David Pelton to each 2 of the two of you, to Charles Eccleston and to 3 Maurice Heath, and that in order to register to 4 speak at this meeting I had to do so by April 16th.

5 Well, I look at my watch and it's 7:00 p.m. on 6 April 16th, so ostensibly I missed the deadline to 7 register to speak for this meeting.

8 I immediately e-mailed both of you 9 following the e-mail address that was given in that 10 April 8th memorandum and those e-mails both bounced 11 back to me. I'd be happy to show you those e-mails 12 after the meeting, as being undeliverable by the 13 NRC. I then left a phone message on both of your 14 phones and got no phone call back, though you did 15 acknowledge that you got my phone call at the 16 beginning of the meeting and welcomed me to the 17 meeting.

18 Obviously from April 16th to now was 19 sufficient time for me to prepare, more or less, 20 though I must say that one of the people I had hoped 21 to talk to before this meeting from the Union of 22 Concerned Scientists was out of the country and 23 unavailable. So as a result of the lack of 24 transparency I'm not as prepared as I would have NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

37 1 liked to be and I can only guess who else might have 2 shown up had the meeting been better in 3 transparency.

4 And so I thank you for your attention 5 and look forward to working with you through the 6 process.

7 MR. ECCLESTON: Thank you.

8 MR. HEATH: All right, thank you for 9 your comment. Now, I have one other person 10 registered, Mr. Bruce Richardson, I believe. Is 11 that correct?

12 MR. RICHARDSON: No comments at this 13 time.

14 MR. HEATH: No comment, okay. Well, 15 like we said before, you can still submit your 16 comments other ways after the meeting up until May 17 25th.

18 Do we have anybody else that would like 19 to provide comments at this time?

20 (No response.)

21 Okay. Well, with that, thank you all 22 for coming to this meeting. We will adjourn this 23 meeting. We will be having another meeting between 24 7:00 and 10:00 upstairs in the community center NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

38 1 room, so if you'd like to stick around or come back, 2 we'll be here this evening. Thank you for coming.

3 (Whereupon the above matter concluded 4 at 2:27 p.m.)

5 6

7 8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

39 1

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML091870099&oldid=2143960"