ML061840036

VYNPS Environmental Scoping Open House Transcript Re. LRA Environmental Review, Pages 1-7

ML061840036
Person / Time
Site:	Vermont Yankee
Issue date:	06/06/2006
From:	NRC/NRR/ADRO/DLR/REBB
To:
References
NRC-1071
Download: ML061840036 (8)

Text

Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Title:

Vermont Yankee License Renewal Public Scoping Meeting Docket Number: (050-00271)

Location: Brattleboro, Vermont Date: Tuesday, June 6, 2006 Work Order No.: NRC-1071 Pages 1-7 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 PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING 5 FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, 6 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION 7 + + + + +

8 TUESDAY, 9 JUNE 6, 2006 10 + + + + +

11 BRATTLEBORO, VERMONT 12 + + + + +

13 The Public Meeting was convened at the 14 Quality Inn at 1380 Putney Road in Brattleboro, 15 Vermont, at 2:00 p.m.

16 SPEAKERS:

17 MICHAEL MULLIGAN 18 NANCY CROMPTON 19 ELLEN KAYE 20 21 22 23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

2 1 P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 2 2:34 p.m.

3 MR. MULLIGAN: Hello. I'm Mike Mulligan.

4 I live in Hinsdale, New Hampshire, P.O. Box, 161, 5 Hinsdale, New Hampshire 03451. And my concern is with 6 global warming. What I understand is that the 7 Connecticut River, upstream of Vermont Yankee has been 8 heating up slightly, especially during the summers.

9 It's been turning up for a decade or so, the peak 10 summertime temperatures, as an example.

11 Or how about river low-flows in a drought 12 situation? So the question is will the re-licensing 13 of Vermont Yankee have -- will they consider what 14 global warming could potentially do with the river 15 temperatures? Will Vermont Yankee have to power down 16 at times for that? Will the environmental 17 temperatures inside the buildings and stuff, are they 18 -- the design environmental temperatures, are they 19 adequate enough so that we wouldn't be confronted with 20 shutting down the plant during the summer, summer 21 time?

22 I'm concerned about say we're in a drought 23 in the summer time and the plant -- and we approach 24 their limits. Probably around that time other plants 25 would be stressed and the grid of New England would be NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

3 1 stressed. So the question is well, do you want to 2 make the grid worse at its most vulnerable time with 3 shutting down Vermont Yankee? Do you want to push the 4 grid electric prices to astronomical prices? Do you 5 want to de-stabilize, the grid maybe, because of not 6 enough voltage or whatever it is.

7 So I'm generally concerned about 8 projecting out what global warming could potentially 9 do and make sure that there's an adequate margin so 10 that you wouldn't have to cycle down the plant during 11 the summer times. That's it. I talked about cycling 12 down the plant. I meant reducing power. So that's 13 either shutting down the plant or reducing power to 50 14 percent or some sort of percent type of thing and 15 stuff.

16 (Off the record.)

17 MS. CROMPTON: Hi. I'm Nancy Crompton, a 18 resident of Brattleboro, Vermont. I live four miles 19 from Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant. My concerns 20 about living so close to the power plant are concerns 21 that, in fact, would not be alleviated even if I were 22 living far away from the nuclear power plant which I 23 have over the past few months been contemplating. The 24 fact is that there are people, there are 103 nuclear 25 power plants in the United States, all of them NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

4 1 generating nuclear waste for which we have no long-2 term disposal solution.

3 I've been told that the Federal Government 4 is supposed to have a plan in place by 2025 and I wish 5 to state that that is utterly unacceptable. It is on 6 our watch right now. It is our generation that is 7 responsible for the creation of the nuclear waste and 8 we need a solution, not soon, not tomorrow, but 9 yesterday, decades ago.

10 We have no moral right to create a poison 11 that can affect the earth and all living creatures for 12 a half life of 25,000 years, if I remember that 13 correctly. We have no moral right to do this.

14 We also do not have to demand so much electricity. We 15 don't really require it. Our inflated desires for the 16 expansion of electrical power have been -- are a 20th 17 century notion of progress at any cost. The cost is 18 now coming due and we are going to have to begin 19 paying for the expansion and -- oh dear, I'm starting 20 to ramble. Can we turn it off?

21 (Off the record.)

22 And I very much want to hear the NRC, the 23 Regulatory Commission and other leaders in our country 24 talking about conservation. This is indeed a war.

25 It's as if we are at war against our unchecked desire NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

5 1 to progress at the expense of other nations and at the 2 expense of the environment. And we can indeed change 3 our ways and show a willingness to conserve.

4 I'm concerned about also climate change.

5 Although the nuclear power plant was probably built to 6 withstand a 500-year storm and its effects on the 7 Connecticut River, since we have been seeing 100-year 8 storms in this area and in Boston over the last six 9 months, perhaps the infrastructure is indeed not 10 adequate to be worse worst case scenario, the kinds of 11 storms that we perhaps should be anticipating will 12 happen in the future.

13 And therefore, I'm very concerned about 14 dry-cask storage, alongside the Connecticut River 15 which flows through Massachusetts and Connecticut to 16 the Long Island Sound and just the idea that nuclear 17 radioactivity could be carried by that water all the 18 way to Long Island Sound should give us great pause.

19 I believe we have to take responsibility right now for 20 the effect that we are having because we are already 21 seeing its effects upon our children and 22 grandchildren.

23 We know that mercury in the ponds in the 24 fish that we happily go out and catch on a Sunday 25 already in Vermont, we can't allow the children to eat NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

6 1 more than four ounces a month and we have seen the 2 effects of children who have more than that. The 3 illnesses and cancers and neurological damage already 4 caused by different kinds of pollutants in Vermont is 5 staggering. We certainly don't need any more.

6 (Off the record.)

7 MS. KAYE: I'm Ellen Kaye. I live in 8 Brattleboro, right on the edge of the evacuation zone, 9 the 10-mile radius of Vermont Yankee. My comments 10 about environmental issues regarding Vermont Yankee 11 that I think should be given serious consideration:

12 (a) maybe the only issue is the waste. We're having 13 an increase in production and a relicensing and a 14 lengthening of the time that Vermont Yankee can 15 operate.

16 What we're getting is more and more waste 17 which we have no way to deal with. That waste is 18 going to last for many, many, many generations. We 19 have no idea what the health effects are going to be.

20 We have no idea what the effects on humans, animals, 21 plant life, everything that makes this place this 22 place. And I am tired of hearing everybody associated 23 with the nuclear power industry and the NRC talk about 24 nuclear power generation without ever addressing 25 waste. So what we have is a hazardous waste dump, a NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

7 1 nuclear waste dump on the banks of the Connecticut 2 River.

3 I'm raising a child here. I hear that 4 cancer rates near the plant are higher than in other 5 places. There's some studies. I hear that Strontium-6 90 turns up in baby teeth. So this is an experimental 7 thing and we're being experimented on and I don't 8 think it should continue. It should be closed down.

9 We should be looking for safer forms of energy 10 production and we should be conserving.

11 But what I want the NRC to weigh heavily, 12 it's the waste issue, environmentally, and the cancer 13 issue. Are there cancer clusters around nuclear power 14 plants? Are there elevated rates of breast cancer 15 around nuclear power plants? I read reports that say 16 that there are and it is unfair to experiment with a 17 population when these are questions hanging in the 18 air. It's unconscionable.

19 I think that's all I need to say today.

20 (Whereupon, at 7:12 p.m., the public 21 meeting was concluded.)

22 23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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