Latest revision as of 18:56, 7 December 2019

Text

VYNPS Scoping Mtg Afternoon Transcript Re. LRA Environmental Review, Pages 1-116
	ML061840033
Person / Time
Site:	Vermont Yankee
Issue date:	06/07/2006
From:	; NRC/NRR/ADRO/DLR/REBB
To:	;
References
	NRC-1072
	Download: ML061840033 (117)
	v • d • e

Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Title:

Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant Public Meeting: Afternoon Session Docket Number: (050-00271)

Location: Brattleboro, Vermont Date: Wednesday, June 7, 2006 Work Order No.: NRC-1072 Pages 1-116 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 AFTERNOON SESSION 8 + + + + +

9 WEDNESDAY 10 JUNE 7, 2006 11 + + + + +

12 BRATTLEBORO, VERMONT 13 + + + + +

14 The Public Meeting was convened at the 15 Latchis Theater at 50 Main Street in Brattleboro, 16 Vermont, at 1:30 p.m., F. "Chip" Cameron, Facilitator, 17 presiding.

18 NRC STAFF PARTICIPATING:

19 F. "CHIP" CAMERON 20 RANI FRANOVICH 21 RICHARD EMCH 22 ERIC BENNER 23 FRANK GILLESPIE 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 SPEAKERS:

2 BETH ADAMS 3 SHAWN BANFIELD 4 JOHN BLOCK 5 CAROL BOYER 6 CORA BROOKS 7 BILL BURTON 8 JOHNNY EADS 9 ROBERT ENGLISH 10 ANN ELIZABETH HOWES 11 SARAH KOTKOV 12 DAN MACARTHUR 13 DAVID MCELWEE 14 EVAN MULHOLLAND 15 JILL NEITLICH 16 NANCY NELKIN 17 JANE NEWTON 18 DEBRA REGER 19 GARY SACHS 20 RAY SHADIS 21 SALLY SHAW 22 CHRIS WILLIAMS 23 MEGAN 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

3 1 P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 2 1:35 p.m.

3 MR. CAMERON: Good afternoon, everybody.

4 If we could ask you all to take your seats and we'll 5 get started with this afternoon's meeting.

6 Okay, Ray, Evan, would you like to join us 7 down here? Are we going to have a lot of continuing 8 feedback with this thing? If we do, let's try to fix 9 it. It seems like there is a lot of feedback.

10 Again, good afternoon and welcome 11 everybody. My name is Chip Cameron, I'm the Special 12 Counsel for Public Liaison at the Nuclear Regulatory 13 Commission, which we'll be referring to as the NRC, 14 today.

15 And it's my pleasure to serve as your 16 Facilitator for today's meeting. And our subject 17 today is the environmental review that the NRC 18 conducts as part of its evaluation of a license 19 application that we received from the Entergy Company 20 to renew the operating license for the Vermont Yankee 21 Reactor.

22 And I just wanted to cover three items of 23 meeting process for you, very quickly, before we get 24 to the substance of our discussions today. And I'd 25 like to talk a little bit about what the format for 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 the meeting is. Secondly, some simple ground rules 2 for running the meeting, and, lastly, I'd just like to 3 introduce the NRC staff who are going to be speaking 4 to you today.

5 In terms of format, we're going to start 6 out with some brief NRC presentations, to give you 7 some background on the license renewal process. What 8 we look at, what we evaluate in making a decision 9 about whether to renew a license for a reactor.

10 And we'll have time for some brief 11 questions after those presentations on the license 12 renewal process, to make sure that you understand it 13 before we go to the primary purpose of today's 14 meeting, which is to hear from all of you on this 15 process.

16 This meeting, as the NRC staff will tell 17 you, is a scoping meeting. That's a term that's used 18 in connection with the preparation of environmental 19 impact statements.

20 And, basically, what we would like to hear 21 from all of you on, is what issues should be looked 22 at, as the NRC prepares the draft environmental impact 23 statement. What methodology should be used? What 24 alternatives?

25 And we're looking forward to hearing from 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 you on that today. And we are taking written comments 2 on these issues, and the staff will tell you how to 3 submit written comments, but we wanted to be here with 4 you in person today to talk with you and to listen to 5 you.

6 In terms of ground rules, they're pretty 7 simple. When you do speak, please introduce yourself 8 to us and give us an affiliation, if you're affiliated 9 with a group.

10 If that's appropriate, tell us that. And 11 I would ask that only one person speak at a time.

12 Most importantly, so we can give our full attention to 13 whomever has the floor at the moment.

14 Also, so that our Court Reporter, Pete 15 Holland, up here, can get a clean transcript. So that 16 he knows who is talking. That transcript is the 17 public record of this meeting.

18 It's our record of the comments and it's 19 your record of what was said here this afternoon. And 20 that will be available to anybody who wants it.

21 I would ask everybody to try to be brief, 22 so that we can give everyone an opportunity to talk 23 this afternoon. And I'm asking everybody to follow a 24 five minute guideline, when they come up here to the 25 podium to give us their comments.

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 If you could limit it to five minutes, 2 that would be helpful, and when it gets close to five 3 minutes I may ask you to summarize your comments for 4 us, so that we can go on to the next person.

5 Five minutes may not seem like a lot of 6 time, but it does accomplish a number of important 7 things. One, it's usually enough time for people to 8 summarize their main points that they want us to hear.

9 Secondly, it alerts us to issues before 10 written comments come in, so that we can start working 11 on those issues right away. And, lastly, it alerts 12 everybody in the audience, in the community, to what 13 some of the concerns are that people have with the 14 renewal application.

15 So, we'll be following that five-minute 16 rule. There is an ability to follow up with more 17 extensive comments in writing. There's also an 18 ability to talk to the NRC staff, who are here from 19 our Headquarters Office and from Region, after the 20 meeting.

21 And we'll also be giving you some contact 22 information so that you can contact people, from the 23 NRC staff, if you have concerns or questions.

24 And I guess, finally, I just would ask all 25 of us, everyone, to just extend courtesy to everybody 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 else. We may hear different opinions on the issues, 2 different opinions from the ones that we hold today.

3 And I would just ask everybody to respect 4 those opinions. In terms of the NRC speakers, we're 5 going to start out this afternoon with an overview of 6 the license renewal process.

7 And we're going to have Rani Franovich, 8 who is right here, to start out for us. And she's the 9 Chief of the Environmental Projects Branch, within the 10 License Renewal Program.

11 And Rani and her staff manage the 12 Environmental Review for all License Renewal 13 Applications, including this one for Vermont Yankee.

14 And Rani has been with the NRC for 14 15 years, in a number of positions and areas of 16 responsibility. She was a Resident Inspector, these 17 are the NRC staff who are at every reactor that we 18 licensed throughout the country, to make sure that NRC 19 regulations are complied with.

20 She also was a Project Manager on the 21 Safety Review for several plants, I believe, that came 22 in for license renewal. She was also the Coordinator 23 of Reactor Enforcement, which was a position that 24 ensured that compliance steps were taken against 25 companies that may have violated the regulations.

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

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

8 1 And, in terms of her educational 2 background, she has a Bachelor's Degree and a Master's 3 Degree from Virginia Tech. And the Master's Degree 4 was in Industrial and Systems Engineering.

5 And after Rani is done, we're going to go 6 right to Mr. Rich Emch, who is right over here. And 7 Richard is the Project Manager for the Environmental 8 Review for the Vermont Yankee License Renewal 9 Application.

10 And he'll be talking about the specifics 11 of the Environmental Review, and how to submit 12 comments. And Rich is an old hand at the NRC. He's 13 been with us for 32 years, and a lot of different 14 positions, mostly related to radiological health and 15 protection.

16 And his background is in Health Physics.

17 He has a Bachelor's in Physics from Louisiana Tech 18 University, and a Master's in Health Physics from the 19 Georgia Institute of Technology.

20 And Rani is going to introduce a number of 21 people, but I just wanted to introduce two people 22 before we get started.

23 One is Eric Benner. And Eric is the, is 24 a Branch Chief of the Branch that does the technical 25 review of the environmental issues that are in the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

9 1 Environmental Impact Statement. And he'll be talking 2 to us tonight and I'll give him a full introduction at 3 that time.

4 And, also, we have Mr. Frank Gillespie 5 here. He is a Senior NRC Manager. Frank is the 6 Division Director of the Division of License Renewal 7 at the NRC in our Office of Nuclear Reactor 8 Regulation.

9 And I just would thank you all for being 10 here to help us with this decision. Rani.

11 MS. FRANOVICH: Thank you, Chip. You guys, 12 can everyone hear me? Is this better? Alright.

13 Thank you, Chip. I just wanted to open up the meeting 14 by thanking you all for coming here.

15 It's nasty weather outside and I 16 understand Vermont has had quite a bit of that 17 recently, and so I'm sorry we couldn't arrange for a 18 prettier day for the meeting, but we're really glad 19 you took the time out of your busy schedules to come 20 and talk with us today.

21 I hope the information that we provide 22 will help you understand the process we will be going 23 through in renewing the application for renewal for 24 Vermont Yankee.

25 And help you understand the role that you NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

10 1 can play in helping us to make sure that the 2 Environmental Impact Statement we prepare for Vermont 3 Yankee License Renewal, is complete and accurate.

4 Next slide, please, Sam. I'd like to 5 start off by briefly going over the purpose of today's 6 meeting. We'll explain the NRC's license renewal 7 process for nuclear power plants, with emphasis on the 8 environmental review process.

9 And we'll talk about the typical -- is 10 this better? Okay. We'll talk about the typical 11 areas included in the scope of our review. We'll also 12 share with you the License Renewal Review Schedule.

13 And really the most important part of 14 today's meeting, is to receive any comments that you 15 have on the scope of our review. They will also give 16 you some information about how you can submit comments 17 to us, outside of this meeting.

18 At the conclusion of the staff's 19 presentation, we will be happy to answer questions and 20 receive comments that you may have on the process and 21 the scope of our review.

22 However, I must ask you to limit your 23 participation to questions only, and hold your 24 comments until the appropriate time during today's 25 meeting.

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

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

11 1 Once all questions are answered, we can 2 begin receiving any comments that you have on the 3 scope of our Environmental Review. Next slide, 4 please.

5 Before I get into a discussion of the 6 License Renewal Process, I'd like to take a minute to 7 talk about the NRC in terms of what we do and what our 8 mission is.

9 The Atomic Energy Act is the legislation 10 that authorizes the NRC to issue operating licenses.

11 The Atomic Energy Act provides for a 40-year license 12 term for power reactors.

13 This 40-year term is based primarily on 14 economic considerations and anti-trust factors, not on 15 safety limitations of the plant. The Atomic Energy 16 Act also authorizes the NRC to regulate civilian use 17 of nuclear materials in the United States.

18 In exercising that authority, the NRC's 19 mission is three-fold. To ensure adequate protection 20 of public health and safety. To promote the common 21 defense and security, and to protect the environment.

22 The NRC accomplishes its mission through 23 a combination of regulatory programs and processes, 24 such as conducting inspections, issuing enforcement 25 actions, assessing Licensee performance, and NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

12 1 evaluating operating experience from nuclear plants 2 across the country and internationally. The 3 regulations that the NRC enforces are contained in 4 Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, which is 5 commonly referred to as 10 CFR. Next slide, please.

6 As I've mentioned, the Atomic Energy Act 7 provides for a 40-year license term for power 8 reactors. Our regulations also include provisions for 9 extending plant operation for up to an additional 20 10 years.

11 For Vermont Yankee the operating license 12 will expire March 21st, 2012. Entergy has requested 13 license renewal for Vermont Yankee. As part of the 14 NRC's review of the License Renewal Application, we 15 will perform an environmental review to look at the 16 impacts on the environment of an additional 20 years 17 of operation.

18 The purpose of this meeting is to give you 19 information about the process, and to seek your input 20 on what issues we should consider, within the scope of 21 our review. Next slide, please.

22 NRC's License Renewal Review is similar to 23 the original licensing processes, in that it involves 24 two parts. An Environmental Review and a safety 25 review. This slide really gives a big picture NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

13 1 overview of the License Renewal Process, which 2 involves these two parallel paths. I'm going to 3 briefly describe how these two review processes work, 4 starting with the safety review. Next slide, please.

5 Two guiding principles form the basis of 6 the NRC's approach in performing its safety review.

7 The first principle is that the current regulatory 8 process is adequate to ensure that the licensing basis 9 of all currently operating plants provides and 10 maintains an acceptable level of safety, with the 11 possible exception of the effects of aging on certain 12 structures, systems and components.

13 The second principle is that the current 14 plant-specific licensing basis must be maintained 15 during the renewal term, in the same manner, and to 16 the same extent, as during the original license term.

17 Next slide, please. You might ask what 18 does the safety review consider? For license renewal, 19 the safety review focuses on aging management of 20 systems, structures and components, which are 21 important to safety, as determined by the license 22 renewal scoping criteria, contained in 10 CFR, Part 5.

23 The license renewal safety review does not 24 assess current operational issues, such as emergency 25 planning and safety performance. The NRC monitors and NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

14 1 provides regulatory oversight of these issues on an 2 ongoing basis, under the current operation license.

3 Because the NRC is addressing these current operating 4 issues, on a continuing basis, we do not re-evaluate 5 them in license renewal. Next slide, please.

6 As I have mentioned, the license renewal 7 safety review focuses on plant aging. And the 8 programs that the Licensee has already implemented, or 9 will implement, to manage the effects of aging.

10 Let me introduce Mr. Johnny Eads, the 11 Safety Project Manager. Thank you, Johnny. Johnny is 12 in charge of the staff's safety review. The safety 13 review involves the NRC staff's evaluation of 14 technical information that's contained in the License 15 Renewal Application.

16 This is referred to as the Safety 17 Evaluation. The NRC staff also conducts audits as 18 part of its Safety Evaluation. There's a team of 19 about 30 NRC Technical Reviewers and Contractors who 20 are conducting the Safety Evaluation at this time.

21 The Safety Review also includes plant 22 inspections. The inspections are conducted by a team 23 of Inspectors, from both Headquarters and the NRC's 24 Region 1 Office in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.

25 A Representative from Inspection Program NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

15 1 is here today. The Resident Inspector of Vermont 2 Yankee is Beth Sienel. Beth, thank you. As Chip 3 mentioned, the Inspectors work at the plant 40 hours4.62963e-4 days 0.0111 hours 6.613757e-5 weeks 1.522e-5 months 4 a week. They live in the community, and they are the 5 eyes and the ears of the NRC.

6 We have at least two, Nuclear Regulatory 7 Commission Inspectors at every plant in the United 8 States. The results of the inspections are documented 9 in separate inspection reports.

10 The staff documents the results of its 11 review in a safety evaluation report. That report is 12 then independently reviewed by the Advisory Committee 13 on Reactor Safeguards or the ACRS.

14 The ACRS is a group of nationally-15 recognized technical experts that serve as a 16 consulting body to the Commission. They review each 17 License Renewal Application and Safety Evaluation 18 Report.

19 They form their own conclusions and 20 recommendations on the requested action, and they 21 report those conclusions and recommendations directly 22 to the Commission. Next slide, please.

23 This slide illustrates how these various 24 activities make up the Safety Review Process. I'd 25 like to point out that these hexagons, the yellow NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

16 1 hexagons on this slide, represent opportunities for 2 public participation. Also, the staff will present 3 the results of the Safety Review, to the ACRS, and 4 that presentation will be open to the public.

5 Next slide, please. The second part of 6 the review process involves an Environmental Review 7 with scoping activities and the development of an 8 Environmental Impact Statement.

9 As I have said, we're here today to 10 receive your comments on the scope of that review.

11 We'll consider any comments on the scope that we 12 receive at this meeting, or in written comments.

13 Then, in December of this year, we expect 14 to issue the draft Environmental Impact Statement, for 15 comment. Next slide. So, the final Agency decision 16 on whether or not to issue a renewed license, depends 17 on several inputs.

18 Inspection Reports and a confirmatory 19 letter from the Region 1 Administrator. Conclusions 20 and recommendations of the ACRS, which are documented 21 in a letter to the Commission. The Safety Evaluation 22 Report, which documents the results of the staff's 23 Safety Review.

24 And the final Environmental Impact 25 Statement which documents the results of the staff's NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

17 1 Environmental Review. Again, the yellow hexagons on 2 the slide indicate opportunities for public 3 participation.

4 An early opportunity is during the scoping 5 meeting today. A meeting on the draft Environmental 6 Impact Statement is another opportunity. The 7 opportunity to request a hearing ended on May 27th.

8 I understand that three Petitions to 9 Intervene were proffered, and among those three there 10 are about ten issues that are in contention. As I 11 mentioned, the ACRS meetings, also, are open to the 12 public.

13 That completes my overview of the License 14 Renewal Review and the Environmental Review in more 15 detail, and Richard Emch, the Project Manager is going 16 to discuss the Environmental Review in a little more 17 detail now.

18 MR. EMCH: Next slide, please. As this 19 slide indicates, we perform our environmental review 20 along the guidelines of the National Environmental 21 Policy Act of 1969.

22 What that Act requires is that Federal 23 agencies use a systematic approach to consider the 24 environmental impacts of major projects. The 25 environmental impact requirement or Environmental NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

18 1 Impact Statement is required any time one of those 2 major Federal actions is going to significantly affect 3 the quality of the human environment.

4 In this particular case for a license 5 renewal, the Commission made the decision that we 6 would issue an Environmental Impact Statement for all 7 License Renewal Applications, and that's what we're 8 about in this process. Next slide, please.

9 This is a, so to speak, a flowchart of the 10 analysis process that we follow. In the 1996 and 11 1999, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission developed 12 something we refer to as the GEIS, the Generic 13 Environmental Impact for License Renewal.

14 This statement evaluated the 92 aspects of 15 environmental impact for all 103 plants in the United 16 States. Of those, 69 of those impact issues were 17 considered to be Category 1 issues, which in our 18 parlance means they were the same, essentially, for 19 all plants and they were small.

20 The rest of the issues are what we call 21 Category 2 issues. The Category 1 issues we do not 22 have to do a plant-specific in-depth evaluation of 23 those issues for each plant.

24 The Category 2 issues we do have to do a 25 plant-specific review for each plant. For Category 1 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

19 1 issues, even though we don't do a plant-specific, in-2 depth review, we do what we call a search for new and 3 significant information.

4 That means we look to see if there's any 5 information that is new and significant, that would 6 cause us to want to reconsider that generic conclusion 7 on the Category 1 issues.

8 On the Category 2 issues, as I said, we do 9 a complete in-depth review. An example of a Category 10 1 issue is radiation protection. The effect on humans 11 of radiation from the plant, releases from the plant.

12 The reason that's a Category 1 issue, is 13 because the NRC has regulatory requirements and has 14 standards and limitations for doses to the public, and 15 the conclusion is, it's a generic conclusion. Because 16 as long as the plant continues to meet those 17 regulations, the impact is considered to be small.

18 An example of a Category 2 issue, is what 19 we call impingement. When the plant is drawing in 20 water from the Connecticut River for their cooling 21 systems, this water comes in through screens and there 22 is the chance that some aquatic organisms will be 23 trapped on those screens and die.

24 And that's an example of an Environmental 25 Impact that we do a plant-specific review for. For NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

20 1 the new and significant information, that's the one 2 that has the little yellow arrow on it.

3 If we find, if in the course of doing our 4 review, if we find that there is new and significant 5 information, that would cause us to question the 6 applicability of the Category 1, the generic 7 conclusion, then, if we find that information then 8 that causes us to change our mind and to do an in-9 depth review of that issue for the plant.

10 Next slide, please. This is the decision 11 standard that we are reviewing against. Basically, my 12 version of it is, we are evaluating the plant to 13 determine if the environmental impact of an additional 14 20 years of operations is acceptable, is okay.

15 Next slide, please. When I say the 16 environmental impact of an additional 20 years, it's 17 important to remember here, I think, that the 18 evaluation that we are doing, is the impact from year 19 2012 to year 2032.

20 In order to do that, though, we have to 21 examine a lot of what is going on today in the 22 environmental impact from the plant. This slide has 23 a, is a schedule for the entire process.

24 I believe you folks all have this slide, 25 but I'm just going to hit a few of the high points.

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

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

21 1 Obviously, the scoping meeting today is part of our 2 scoping process. The scoping process, in the parlance 3 of NEPA, is we come into the community and we ask the 4 people who live and work near the plant, I sometimes 5 refer to you folks as our local environmental experts 6 because you live and work here.

7 We ask you if there's any information that 8 you think we need to know about. Any issues that you 9 think we need to review, in the environmental impact, 10 and any information that you think we need to be 11 available, that we need to be aware of.

12 That's our purpose, our stated purpose for 13 being here tonight. My purpose for being here tonight 14 is to hear what you folks have to say about that 15 issue.

16 There are other ways to give us those 17 comments. You can send them to us in writing. You 18 can send them by e-mail. And if you choose to do 19 that, instead of speaking tonight, we need to receive 20 those comments by June 23rd.

21 After we get those comments, we'll 22 evaluate them all, along with all the other 23 information that we have, and we'll develop a draft 24 Environmental Impact Statement.

25 We'll issue that. The current schedule NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

22 1 for that is December of this year. After we issue 2 that draft Environmental Impact Statement, we will 3 come back, probably to this same theater, in January, 4 and hold another public meeting where we will ask you, 5 the public, to give us your comments about that draft 6 Environmental Report.

7 You can tell us what you like, what you 8 don't like, what you think we missed, that sort of 9 thing. And, to help you with that, those of you who 10 are attending tonight, there were blue and yellow 11 cards.

12 If you filled out one of those cards, 13 hopefully you gave us your address, and when we 14 publish the draft Environmental Impact Statement, 15 we'll send a copy of it to you, so that you will know 16 that the process has started and you'll have good head 17 start on the process.

18 After we collect the public comments, 19 we'll then issue, we'll take those into consideration, 20 make adjustments as necessary in the draft, the draft 21 statement, and issue the final statement in August of 22 2007. Next slide, please.

23 This is a depiction of all the various 24 areas that we draw information from. First is, of 25 course, the Licensee's Application. There's a piece NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

23 1 of the Application called the Environmental Report.

2 There's copies of it outside, if you want 3 to take a look at it. If anybody wants to get a copy 4 of it, if you'll so note, on that little yellow or 5 blue card, we'll send you a copy of it.

6 We'll probably send you a cd, it's kind of 7 heavy, the whole report is. We also do, we have a 8 team of people from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 9 and our Contractor, Argonne National Laboratory.

10 The head of the team, the Lab Team, is 11 David Miller. David Miller is the Head of the Lab 12 Team from Argonne National Laboratory. They are a 13 team of experts in various areas, that help us do the 14 review for the environmental aspect, for the 15 environmental impact.

16 When we do an audit, we come out to the 17 site for a week-long look at the facility, at the 18 environs, we examine documentation. We meet with 19 people who we need to consult with, such as in the 20 state of Vermont, one is the Agency for Natural 21 Resources.

22 We met with the State Radiation Protection 23 people. We'll be meeting with others as time goes on.

24 We met with the State Historic Preservation Officer.

25 And we meet with local government officials, as well.

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

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

24 1 We meet with Social Services. One of the 2 issues that we look into is socio-economics. We 3 talked to permitting authorities in the state of 4 Vermont.

5 The state is responsible, has been 6 delegated the responsibility by EPA, to issue what we 7 call the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination 8 System Permit.

9 This is a permit that talks about what 10 level of heat and chemicals are allowed to be released 11 by the plant. And then finally, the thing that we're 12 here for tonight, is the public comments.

13 To get information from you folks to help 14 us with our review. Next slide, please. This is a 15 depiction of all the various areas, in a broad sense, 16 that we look at.

17 We look at environmental justice. We look 18 at socio-economics, air quality, water quality, 19 terrestrial and aquatic ecology, radiation protection, 20 hydrology, and archeology and culture resources. And 21 if I missed any, they're on the chart behind me.

22 Now I'd like to talk directly, give you 23 some additional information. First, as I said, my 24 name is Rich Emch. The phone number that you can 25 reach me at is on that slide up there.

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

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

25 1 We have made arrangements to have the 2 documents involved in the review, the Environmental 3 Report, any letters that we sent to the Licensee, any 4 requests for additional information, and, indeed, when 5 we issue the draft Environmental Statement, it will be 6 sent to these four libraries.

7 The Vernon Free Library in Vernon, the 8 Brooks Memorial Library here in Brattleboro. The 9 Hinsdale Public Library in Hinsdale, New Hampshire, 10 and the Dickinson Memorial Library in Northfield, 11 Massachusetts.

12 All four of these public libraries 13 graciously volunteered to make the documents available 14 so that members of the public can see them, just in 15 case you don't have access to a computer, to the 16 Internet.

17 If you do have access to the Internet, the 18 documents can also be viewed at the web site on the 19 slide up here. To send us written comments on, during 20 this scoping process, you can send them, by mail, to 21 the address that's up here.

22 You can send them by e-mail to the address 23 that's up there, VermontYankeeeis@NRC.gov. My staff 24 and I will be checking that web address everyday. Or, 25 you can deliver them in person to our offices in NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

26 1 Rockville, Maryland.

2 Again, as I mentioned before, we need to 3 receive the comments by June 23rd. If you don't quite rd 4 meet the June 23 , date - anything that we get by 5 June 23rd, we will consider.

6 Anything that we get after June 23rd, 7 we'll consider if there's time to do it. With that, 8 that completes my presentation. Actually, it 9 completes the NRC's presentation, and Chip, are you 10 ready for questions?

11 MR. CAMERON: Yes, I think we are. Are 12 there questions on, that will help you to understand 13 this process a little bit more clearly, before we go 14 into the comment part of the meeting. Yes, ma'am, if 15 you could just introduce yourself to us, please.

16 MS. NEITLICH: Yeah, my name is Jill 17 Neitlich. And I have a question about the democratic 18 process, and I did ask you before, Rich. And 19 basically what I think you said to me was that you 20 have a script and there's no room for the democratic 21 process.

22 But I'm kind of concerned about the 23 democratic process within the NRC. Because what I've 24 noted is that you haven't really turned down an 25 application for an uprate or for a license renewal.

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

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

27 1 So that's a little confusing to me.

2 So does that mean that actually there is 3 no democratic process within the NRC?

4 MR. CAMERON: Thank you, Jill, and Rich, 5 there's a number of issues there, and one is the 6 turning down of applications, and I'm not sure what 7 Jill is referring to by a democratic process within 8 the NRC.

9 But you might talk about what that process 10 is, for her.

11 MR. EMCH: Okay. Yes, Jill, and I did talk 12 before the meeting. Sort of a paraphrase of what I 13 said, Jill, but I'll try to be a little more complete 14 here.

15 MR. CAMERON: Rich, excuse me for 16 interrupting you, but this is for everybody. When you 17 come down to this mic, I guess it's not projecting 18 back, so you really sort of need to speak into the 19 mic, so that everybody can hear you.

20 This one is, but you can't hear this one, 21 at all.

22 MR. EMCH: You can't hear me when I talk on 23 this mic? Oh, you have to be really close to it, 24 okay.

25 MR. CAMERON: Try to do it with that one, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

28 1 and then if it doesn't work, then we'll figure this 2 out. Go ahead.

3 MR. EMCH: All right, I'm going to try to 4 hold it up real close, without actually inhaling it.

5 All right.

6 MR. CAMERON: Closer and louder.

7 MR. EMCH: Okay, I'll see what I can do.

8 What I was trying to say earlier was the democratic 9 process, if you will, occurs before we get to this, 10 here, okay.

11 The democratic process, if you will, is 12 when you go, when you as a community vote for the 13 members of your select board, your state 14 representative, your congressmen and state senators.

15 Your elected officials are the democratic 16 process. They're the ones who you rely on to make 17 decisions about what you, how things are going to work 18 in your state. The process that we're involved in is, 19 the Nuclear Regulatory Commissions's process is the 20 Licensee makes an application and the Nuclear 21 Regulatory Commission reviews it and makes decisions 22 based on its review of that application.

23 We do not, as part of that review process, 24 we, our review is against a set of technical review 25 standards, both either on the safety side or the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

29 1 environmental side, and we don't, there is nothing in 2 our process that calls for a vote, by the people of 3 Brattleboro, about whether or not they want this plant 4 to be re-licensed.

5 As I said, the democratic process occurs 6 when you go to the polls, the voting booths, to vote 7 for your elected officials, and then they're the ones 8 who you rely on to make your decisions for your state 9 and your community.

10 MR. CAMERON: And, Rich, something that I 11 think, a point that Jill raised that's of interest to 12 everybody, is the status of our review of other 13 License Renewal Applications, and not just direct 14 answer to, well how many have we approved or denied, 15 but what that process is like in terms of a License 16 Application coming in?

17 Is there enough information in it to 18 request for additional information? If you could just 19 address that briefly, and then we'll go to other 20 people.

21 MR. EMCH: When an application is first 22 sent in, we do what we call an Acceptance Review.

23 Those of you who were here on March 1st, heard Johnny 24 describe the Acceptance Review.

25 Basically, that review is just to make NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

30 1 sure that there's enough of the appropriate kind of 2 information in the application to allow the NRC staff 3 to start its review.

4 Later on, as we go through the review, we 5 do our review against published technical standards, 6 both in the safety and environmental area. You've 7 heard Rani talk about the audits, the inspections.

8 And what we're doing in our review 9 process, is we're doing our review to make sure that 10 whatever the Licensee has put forward as their 11 application, meets our standards.

12 And if it meets our standards, the 13 Commission is probably going to accept the application 14 and probably going to approve the application, because 15 that's the way we do our work, we use standards.

16 Along the way, we're going to ask a lot of 17 questions. We refer to them as a request for 18 additional information. There will be hundreds of 19 them on Vermont Yankee, if it's anything like the 20 other plants.

21 There will be times along the way when we 22 will tell them that they, that what they have given us 23 does not meet our standards. And we will say you need 24 to consider, you either need to go back to the drawing 25 board in that particular area, but whatever you do, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

31 1 you're going to have to do something, because you're 2 not meeting our standards in that area. And the 3 Licensee, the Applicant, will almost undoubtedly, as 4 all the 42 that have followed before them have done, 5 in all those areas the Licensee will go back and make 6 adjustments and eventually give us plans and 7 information that meets our standards and then the 8 application will be approved. That's the process that 9 we follow.

10 MR. CAMERON: Okay, other, thank you, Rich.

11 Are there other questions on process that we can 12 answer for you, before we go to comments? Evan, if 13 you could just introduce yourself.

14 MR. MULHOLLAND: My name is Evan 15 Mulholland. You had a slide, information gathering.

16 And my question is does the NRC, on the environmental 17 front, does the NRC passively take information that's 18 submitted, or there are staff members that go out and 19 do extra studies and assessments and that sort?

20 MR. EMCH: We consult with a wide range of 21 people, Fish and Wildlife Service, NOAA Marine Fishery 22 Service, the Agency for Natural Resources in the state 23 of Vermont, with the state organizations in New 24 Hampshire and Massachusetts.

25 We consult with a wide range of experts NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

32 1 and people who are in the know. We don't go out and 2 actually count fish, no. But we talk to the people 3 who do.

4 MR. CAMERON: Okay, and part of the purpose 5 of the scoping and comment process on the draft 6 Environmental Impact Statement, is to the extent that 7 we have not found information on our own, we look for 8 people to submit information that may be relevant to 9 our review, right?

10 MR. EMCH: Correct.

11 MR. CAMERON: Okay. Anybody else have a 12 question on the License Renewal Process? Okay, let's 13 go over there and find out what the questions is. And 14 if you could just introduce yourself to us now.

15 MS. NELKIN: Hi, I'm Nancy Nelkin. Well, 16 referring to the democratic process question before, 17 one of the issues is, you know, you are saying well we 18 elected our representatives.

19 This plant is in Vermont, just miles from 20 the Massachusetts border. Those of us in 21 Massachusetts and in New Hampshire, don't have a 22 democratic process.

23 Furthermore, the Nuclear Regulatory 24 Commission, you know, you guys have this whole 25 bureaucracy and lawyers, and it's really not fair, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

33 1 it's not a fair fight.

2 MR. EMCH: I'm not sure what your question 3 is, ma'am?

4 MS. NELKIN: Actually, I have a number of 5 questions, so bear with me. It was said early in the 6 presentation that the 40-year license was not based on 7 a safety concern, it was based on an economic concern.

8 How do we know when a plant is no longer 9 safe to operate? That's a question I have. One of 10 the speakers went over and said, oh, we're going to do 11 assessments and inspections, and inspections and 12 almost counted how many times she said the word 13 inspections, but it's never been an independent safety 14 assessment that we have asked for.

15 And, essentially, has been rammed down our 16 throats. So, you know, my feeling is that the idea of 17 assessments, you know, as long as you're going over 18 paperwork and talking to people who, you know, aren't 19 taking a fresh look at it, we don't feel safe.

20 MS. FRANOVICH: Let me address --

21 MS. NELKIN: And I have another question.

22 And that is --

23 MS. FRANOVICH: Before you ask, before you 24 ask --

25 MS. NELKIN: -- this is the third NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

34 1 question.

2 MS. FRANOVICH: -- but let me answer that 3 one, so I don't lose track of it, before you get to 4 your third one, and then, Rich, can we come back and 5 get our third one, after I answer the --

6 MR. CAMERON: Yeah, and I just want to say 7 is that we welcome your comments and hope that you 8 make some of your conclusions, give those to us when 9 we go to the speaking part.

10 But if you could just give us the 11 questions and we'll try to answer them. And, Rani, 12 you want to go to the second question?

13 MS. FRANOVICH: If it's okay, I'd like to 14 go on and answer the 40-year license term, and then 15 the reliance on inspections. And then we'll get to 16 your third one.

17 The 40-year license term is based on 18 economic considerations and anti-trust factors. When 19 it comes to plant aging, and when a plant becomes too 20 old to safely operate, it's really not so much about 21 the plant, it's about the systems, the structures and 22 the components that are relied on to make sure the 23 plant can operate safely.

24 And so we don't look at it on a plant 25 basis, we look at each individual structure, component NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

35 1 and system, that's important to safety. And we make 2 sure that either it's replaced, it's refurbished, or 3 they test it or they monitor it, or they do something 4 to manage the aging of that structure, component or 5 system. So that's how --

6 MS. NELKIN: So you're suggesting that a 7 plant will never be obsolete as long as you can 8 replace the parts?

9 MS. FRANOVICH: I'm suggesting that for 10 license renewal, what we look at is the management of 11 aging of structures, components and systems, rather 12 than when does the magic day happen when the plant is 13 no longer safe.

14 As to the inspections, yeah, we do conduct 15 inspections. We send people to the plant to look at 16 the material condition. To look at aging management 17 in place, aging management programs the Applicant is 18 relying on today, to manage the effects of aging.

19 And so it's not just a paper review. We 20 actually do --

21 MS. NELKIN: But the people from the NRC, 22 who already have a track record --

23 MS. FRANOVICH: Right.

24 MS. NELKIN: -- don't we know, to let 25 things go --

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

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

36 1 MS. FRANOVICH: And so, the NRC --

2 MS. NELKIN: -- in lieu of the 3 regulations.

4 MS. FRANOVICH: Could I please answer your 5 question. The NRC's position is that it's an 6 independent Federal agency that has the role and 7 responsibility of regulating nuclear material use in 8 this country, including operators of nuclear power 9 plants.

10 There's also the Advisory Committee on 11 Reactor Safeguards, that then independently reviews 12 the work of the staff and reports its recommendations 13 and conclusions directly to the Commission.

14 MS. NELKIN: Okay, one more question, and 15 that is why are we looking at this license renewal in 16 2006. You know, I would like to see the track record 17 of Vermont Yankee between now and at least 2010, 18 before we make this decision.

19 MS. FRANOVICH: The regulations require 20 that an Applicant have about 20 years of operating 21 experience before they can come in for renewal. But 22 in order to ensure that there is a timely review of 23 their application, because this is, it's a significant 24 capital investment for an Applicant to apply for 25 license renewal.

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

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

37 1 They want to know the outcome of the 2 Regulators decision process in a timely manner. So, 3 we require that they submit their applications within 4 five years of the end of their 40-year license term.

5 So anywhere between 20, year 20 and year 6 35, an Applicant can come in for renewal. And when 7 they decide to do that, it is really kind of an 8 economic decision of there's of their choosing.

9 MR. CAMERON: Okay, thank you. Thank you 10 for those questions and, thanks, Rani and Rich. Yes, 11 sir.

12 MR. BLOCK: I have two questions that are 13 connected. My name is John Block, that's B-l-o-c-k.

14 The first question is how often does the input that 15 you receive from the public, actually effect the scope 16 of a GEIS?

17 And the second is, please cite for me 18 which specific cases I could look up and find, in a 19 GEIS, or a draft GEIS, evidence of the effect of the 20 public comments upon that process. Thank you.

21 MR. CAMERON: Okay, thank you, Jonathan.

22 Richard.

23 MR. EMCH: I don't know that I can tell you 24 how many, you know, on every single one, but I'll give 25 you an example, sir. I was the Project Manager for NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

38 1 the Millstone Plant review in Waterford, Connecticut 2 that ended last year. And during scoping a number of 3 local citizens provided us, during the scoping 4 meeting, they provided us copies of studies about 5 radiation heath effects.

6 Most of them we already knew about, but 7 there were a couple of them that were fairly local, 8 that we were not aware of. And so they provided those 9 to us.

10 And in Section 4.7 of the Final 11 Environmental Impact Statement that we wrote, we 12 discussed the status review of those studies.

13 MR. CAMERON: Okay, thank you, John. We're 14 going to take two final questions here and then we're 15 going to go to public comment. Yes.

16 MEGAN: My name is Megan, and I was 17 wondering if the Hinsdale Evacuation Point is in 18 Keene, and is it part of the evaluation assessment?

19 MR. CAMERON: Okay, Rich, could you, 20 there's a, did you hear the question?

21 MR. EMCH: I did, Chip.

22 MR. CAMERON: Okay.

23 MR. EMCH: As Rani mentioned in her 24 presentation, license renewal does not really address 25 emergency preparedness. As Rani also mentioned, the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

39 1 reasons why it doesn't and is, that it's just not 2 considered to be something that we would, it's a today 3 issue.

4 If there was a problem, it's a today 5 issue. If there is a problem with an Emergency 6 Preparedness Plan, it's not something that we want to 7 be waiting until 2010 or 2012, to be assessing.

8 If there's an issue with emergency 9 preparedness, it's something that needs to be 10 addressed now, for the current operating plant. And 11 there are processes in place to do that.

12 The Nuclear Regulatory has processes.

13 FEMA has processes. The state of Vermont, the state 14 of New Hampshire have processes to do that. They have 15 regular drills and exercises where they identify 16 places in the plan that need to be improved, and that 17 is indeed what is happening here.

18 I understand there were some questions 19 about school buses, during the last exercise in New 20 Hampshire, and the state of New Hampshire is taking 21 actions to address those.

22 MR. CAMERON: Okay, and that answers the 23 question about the relationship of emergency planning 24 to license renewal.

25 But just as an emergency planning issue NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

40 1 for Megan's benefit, Hinsdale is part of the emergency 2 planning review? I guess I'm asking a question?

3 MR. EMCH: Hinsdale is inside the ten mile 4 EPZ, yes sir.

5 MR. CAMERON: Okay, all right, thank you.

6 And let's go to Gary. If you could just introduce 7 yourself to us.

8 MR. SACHS: Gary Sachs, Brattleboro. I 9 heard you say that you look to these environmental 10 impact meetings to determine the scope of your impact, 11 to learn things from us.

12 And this is a partial comment and a 13 partial question. For the most part, we, in the local 14 environment are volunteers. And very few of us have 15 enough time, very, very few of us have the dedication 16 to this issue that we certainly would expect from you, 17 as the NRC, and from individuals who work with 18 Entergy.

19 And, so I think it's an awful lot to ask 20 the locals to come to you with how we should approach 21 the environmental scope and how it affects the 22 environment.

23 My other question is more direct. How 24 many NRC paid employees are here today, given the 25 number of us, residents, who are not paid here? Thank NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

41 1 you.

2 MR. CAMERON: Okay, thank you, Gary. And, 3 Rich, in regard to Gary's first point, you did 4 mentioned that you talked to state and local 5 government agencies about issues, right?

6 MR. EMCH: Let me give a slightly broader 7 answer than that, Chip.

8 MR. CAMERON: Okay, all right.

9 MR. EMCH: As I mentioned earlier, we have 10 the Generic Environmental Impact Statement, and what 11 we did was we found approximately, we searched and 12 found approximately, decided approximately 92 issues 13 that are always part of the scope of the review.

14 And we do a search, an exhaustive search 15 for additional information. And when I said that 16 we're here to ask you for your help, we can do the 17 review without your help, if that's what you're 18 driving at, sir.

19 But we think it's important for us to come 20 out and ask you for your help, just in case there is 21 some information that you have that we don't. And 22 that's why we're here.

23 MR. CAMERON: And I guess there was a 24 question. Gary asked about the number of NRC 25 employees, and I would say that all of the NRC NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

42 1 employees who are here tonight, or today, are paid as 2 employees of the government. And I don't know 3 approximately how many people we have here, but Rich?

4 MR. EMCH: Approximately 25.

5 MR. CAMERON: Okay. We're going to go to 6 public comment now, and thank you for those questions, 7 and thank you Rich. We're going to go to Mr. Ray 8 Shadis, first, to lead off for us.

9 And Ray is with the New England Coalition 10 and he'll tell you more about that. And I don't think 11 we, Deb Katz is not here right now. So, I'll let you 12 know who is going to speak next.

13 MR. SHADIS: The New England Coalition 14 intends to file written comments. We have a number of 15 comments. I pulled out four to address in the two 16 meetings this afternoon and this evening.

17 And by agreement with the NRC folks, just 18 as to not take up too much time, I'm going to deal 19 with two of them this afternoon and then the other two 20 this evening.

21 Basically, the four issues are the off-22 site spent fuel pool accident consequences, 23 radiological consequences. The cumulative off-site 24 radiological impact of routine operations, as well as 25 the radiological impact of routine operations on NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

43 1 eventual decommissioning.

2 And the cumulative off-site impact of 3 chemical releases unplanned. And, finally, 4 consideration of the advances in the discipline of 5 seismological evaluation.

6 And I would just start with the spent fuel 7 pool accident off-site consequences. I don't know if 8 a spent fuel pool accident or act of sabotage, is 9 within the design basis accident that are considered 10 in the environmental assessment or not.

11 The credibility of such accidents was 12 roundly studied by NRC staff in NUREG 1738, on the 13 accident risk and decommissioning nuclear power 14 stations. And that study, in turn, referenced a 15 number of other NRC studies, many of them having to do 16 with operating plants.

17 Two of those studies specifically 18 considered Vermont Yankee on a site-specific basis.

19 One of those studies dealt with the seismic fragility 20 of two spent fuel pools. One in a PWR, and then one 21 in a boiler water reactor that happens to be Vermont 22 Yankee.

23 NRC's consultant, seismic consultant, Dr.

24 Robert P. Kennedy, in an appendix to NUREG 1738, says 25 that the postulated critical failure mode for the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

44 1 Vermont Yankee spent fuel pool, would be a plane sheer 2 failure of the floor slat. Then it goes on to say, 3 possibly, the entire floor will drop out.

4 But I think such a gross failure is 5 unlikely. And then he goes on to say, that in his 6 opinion, a more likely failure would be a wall 7 failure, in that case leaving as much as four feet of 8 water in the bottom of the pool.

9 And, of course, you gentlemen know that if 10 there is some water left in the pool, it is a far more 11 dangerous situation, then if the pool was drained 12 completely.

13 Because that water will then block cooling 14 up through the fuel assemblies. And I need to point 15 out that, from our perspective, that the issue that 16 probably needs to be addressed, in your environmental 17 impact study, or in a supplement to it, would be the 18 consequences.

19 And the appendix, let's see, where is it 20 now. Just one moment. Yeah, Table A4-7, this is in 21 Appendix 4. Using the base case of Millstone 1, which 22 is a reactor almost identical to Vermont Yankee, with 23 just three and a half cores in the spent fuel pool.

24 Vermont Yankee has probably twice that or 25 close to twice that. It speculates that with 95 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

45 1 percent evacuation, the Table includes an estimate of 2 26,800 cancer fatalities within a distance of zero to 3 500 miles.

4 Whether that's strictly speculative, 5 postulated or whatever, they're at six, in the Table, 6 in a referenced NRC study, NUREG CR-5176. And those 7 numbers have not be repudiated, they have not been put 8 out there in speculative space.

9 I think, when the original license was 10 issued, for Vermont Yankee and estimates were made, 11 public representations were made as to the potential 12 for consequences of a design-basis accident, we had 13 certain numbers given to us.

14 And, since that time, of course there's 15 been a lot of representation from the industry and 16 also from NRC, in essence, diminishing those numbers, 17 putting all of those numbers away.

18 I guess it's New England Coalition's 19 position that NRC really needs to reconcile the 20 numbers from the original license time, license 21 period, and the representations that are being made by 22 NRC spokespersons today.

23 By the Utility spokespersons and the 24 numbers in this report, which I think are quite 25 outstanding. So, that is, that is one comment.

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

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

46 1 And the, on the second topic, cumulative 2 off-site radiological impact of routine operations and 3 also the cumulative impact of routine operations and 4 radiologically on decommissioning.

5 There are two things that we would like 6 you to consider. One is that, as you know, the state 7 of Vermont posts radiation measuring devices, TLDs, 8 around the plant perimeter.

9 And the state reports that three times in 10 the last decade or so, that the state limit of 20 11 millirem per year has been exceeded at the fence line.

12 And we took a quick look at those reports 13 for those three years, and then also at a study, I 14 believe, done by Duke Engineering for Vermont Yankee, 15 and found that the TLDs in the same sector were the 16 ones that read high in each of those instances.

17 And, you know, this is not an anomaly for 18 a bad detection instrument, because they are changed 19 out quarterly, and the excess is the average over a 20 year.

21 The other thing that we noticed is that 22 the only other abnormally high reading, that occurred 23 in each of those three instances, was at the interior 24 of the Vernon Elementary School. The other thing that 25 we noticed was that the turbine hall and the offending NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

47 1 TLD, and the elementary school, line up axially.

2 There's a straight line to be drawn from the turbine 3 hall, to the one monitor that read high, to the 4 elementary school reading high.

5 The state folks thought this might be an 6 artifact of excess of radon in the school. But, of 7 course, we don't generally use TLDs to go chasing 8 radon. The other thing that we noticed, was that 9 there was no correlation between the measured amount 10 of radon in the school, for those instances, and the 11 high TLD readings.

12 From an amateur science point of view, we 13 believe there's enough here to warrant real 14 investigation.

15 (Applause.)

16 MR. SHADIS: I should point out to you that 17 we have not looked for correlation on weather or 18 meteorological conditions, but it might well be a 19 consideration that these high readings are a result of 20 temperature inversion and downdraft from the release 21 stack.

22 In any case, just for the sake of these 23 little nuclear workers over there in the elementary 24 school, we really do think this shall be part of the 25 environmental scoping.

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

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

48 1 The other thing, very quickly, in terms of 2 cumulative radiological impact, I discussed this 3 briefly with Dr. Masnik, here from NRC, earlier.

4 Vermont Yankee had gotten permission to 5 store contaminated soil on site, starting back, I 6 think in 1998, maybe a little earlier. And, at the 7 time, the amount was some excavated soil from a 8 construction project, about 135 cubic yards.

9 And then roughly at 35 or 40 cubic yards 10 per year, they anticipated generating through 11 contaminated sanding salts from the roads from silt in 12 the cooling towers, and also from waste sludge.

13 And, in 2004, Entergy received permission 14 to increase that amount. They had accumulated, they 15 thought, about 500 cubic meters of contaminated soil 16 on site, and they wished to dispose of, on-site, an 17 additional 150 cubic meters per year.

18 That's about ten big dump truck loads.

19 And this disposal site or, excuse me, this storage 20 site is on the south end of the site, just south of 21 the cooling towers.

22 It is constantly sprayed down with what is 23 called drift, sideways spray from the cooling towers.

24 It is on the riverbank. We believe that the 25 phenomenon of bio uptake, of sedimentary separation, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

49 1 of chemical combination, can leach and separate and 2 concentrate the radioactive material in that disposed 3 of or stored soil, complicating decommissioning, 4 polluting the river, winding up in the biota.

5 And so we believe that should also be 6 investigated as part of the environmental assessment.

7 Those are the two topics. Thank you for listening 8 that long.

9 MR. CAMERON: Well, great, and thank you 10 for those specific comments, Ray.

11 MR. SHADIS: And we'll provide documents.

12 As I said, we will be doing written comments.

13 MR. CAMERON: Okay. Thank you, Ray. Let's 14 go to Evan, Evan Mulholland. And then we'll go to 15 Chris Williams and then Shawn Banfield. Evan 16 Mulholland.

17 MR. MULHOLLAND: I have written comments, 18 I'm just going to read them. My name is Evan 19 Mulholland. I'm an attorney representing the New 20 England Coalition in its appeal in Vermont 21 Environmental Court of the Clean Water Act Permanent 22 Amendment recently issued for the Vermont Yankee Power 23 Plant, as full disclosure.

24 I'm here today, though, as a member of the 25 public and I'm concerned about the impact on our NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

50 1 environment of 20 more years of operation of the 2 Vermont Yankee reactor.

3 Specifically, I've got concerns about the 4 effect on the Connecticut River and on the fish and 5 other wildlife that live in and on the river.

6 According to the environmental report drafted for this 7 license renewal process, Entergy states that it 8 withdraws water to cool the reactor, from the river, 9 at a rate of up to 360,000 gallons per minute when 10 using once through cooling.

11 The majority of this water is discharged 12 back into the river at temperatures that can reach 100 13 degrees Fahrenheit, at the point of discharge. The 14 recently issued NPDES Permit Amendment, which New 15 England Coalition is appealing, allows for Vermont 16 Yankee to increase the temperature of the river by an 17 additional one degree Fahrenheit over what it was 18 previously allowed.

19 The environmental impact of this extra 20 thermal waste discharged into the river, is 21 potentially significant. Temperature is critical for 22 American Shad and other fish species, particularly 23 during migration and spawning.

24 Even this one degree increase in water 25 temperature may adversely effect the Shad and other NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

51 1 species, reducing their population in the river 2 system. In its report, however, Entergy does not 3 assess these impacts.

4 Entergy's conclusion that the impact on 5 the environment is small, is based on the fact that 6 the discharge complies with state and Federal 7 pollution limits.

8 There's no further discussion of what 9 effect another 20 years of increased thermal discharge 10 will have on the eco-system. Whether or not the 11 discharge from Vermont Yankee is in compliance with 12 its State and Federal permits, Entergy should be 13 required to take a hard look at, and assess a direct, 14 indirect and cumulative impacts on the river eco-15 system of 20 more years of increased thermal 16 discharge. Thanks.

17 MR. CAMERON: Thank you very much, Evan.

18 Is Chris Williams here? Chris.

19 MR. WILLIAMS: My name is Chris Williams.

20 I live in Hancock in Addison County. And I'm not 21 certain that my unprepared remarks here are going to 22 be completely on point, but I believe that the safe 23 operation and safe oversight of any operating nuclear 24 power plant in this country, or in the world, has a 25 significant long-term impact on the environment in the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

52 1 area where the plant is located. And, just for the 2 record, standing here in Brattleboro, I want to point 3 out some experiences I've had in two locations in the 4 United States.

5 The first is in the state of Ohio. I 6 lived in the Midwest for quite a while, doing battle 7 with the nuclear industry, as well as the coal-fired 8 electric industry.

9 In Port Clinton, Ohio, the Davis Besse 10 Nuclear Power Plant is operated by First Energy 11 Corporation. Several years ago, with significant 12 Nuclear Regulatory Commission on-site oversight, it 13 was discovered that a boric acid leak had eaten a hole 14 in the reactor vessel lid, which is about 18 inches 15 thick.

16 That hole came within several millimeters, 17 several millimeters of breaching. The whole thing 18 happened, as I said, under the oversight of the 19 Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

20 Outside that plant, there's a big sign.

21 It has safety is Job One. What happened at Davis 22 Besse was criminal. That the Nuclear Regulatory 23 Commission allowed them to go get another vessel head 24 from Midland Plant, which was canceled, up in 25 Michigan, and put that plant back in operation, was NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

53 1 nothing short of criminal. The second reactor that I 2 had quite of a bit of experience with in the Midwest 3 was in Bridgeman, Michigan.

4 It was the DC Cook Nuclear Power Plant, 5 owned by then, American Electric Power. The Bridgeman 6 Plant was shut down after it was discovered that 7 significant safety features in the plant were not 8 operating, in some cases, for more, not operating 9 properly, for some cases, for more than ten years.

10 Outside that plant there's another sign 11 that said safety is Job One. Those safety systems 12 were non-operational with significant daily oversight, 13 on-site, by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

14 Here at Vernon, as in the rest of the 15 country, it's part of the operating license that the 16 Nuclear Regulatory Commission gives the companies that 17 operate these power plants, as part of that process 18 and part of that license, they're allowed to routinely 19 emit radioactive releases, in both the air and water.

20 I'm sure everybody in this room knows 21 that. Long-term, that's a problem. We'd like to know 22 how much has been released by the operation of Vermont 23 Yankee, year-to-date, or operational lifetime to date.

24 And how much is projected under routine 25 operational conditions? How much is going to 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

54 1 released over the proposed license extension?

2 I want to close with just one other 3 observation. Recently, several people, four from 4 Vermont, traveled to Kiev to attend a conference, th 5 marking the 20 Anniversary of the accident at 6 Chernobyl.

7 There were probably 150 of us that took 8 the conference organizers up on the opportunity to go 9 visit the Chernobyl site. And I have to say, we've 10 all seen the pictures. And the pictures actually, 11 they do the situation justice.

12 What struck me the most was that the 13 people living 30, 40 kilometers away, from the 14 accident site, very basic, poor, agrarian folks. They 15 were people that depend on their land for everything.

16 And what's just painfully obvious, when 17 you visit there? Is that their lives have been 18 destroyed by the technology that was arrogantly placed 19 and operated 30 to 40 kilometers away.

20 And the folks that lived in Pripyat, the 21 community that built and operated Chernobyl, well, you 22 know, they're not there anymore. Pripyat is a ghost 23 town.

24 But the one thing that the locals, the 25 non-nuclear locals had, was their land. And it was NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

55 1 taken away from them. So as we look to re-license 2 Vermont Yankee, we have to draw a parallel.

3 We're not so different from the, from the 4 people in the Ukraine or in Belarus. And when these 5 companies tell us that safety is their Number One job 6 and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission assures us that 7 they're on the job all the time.

8 I don't believe we can take those claims 9 seriously, and have to do everything we can to ensure 10 that arrogance doesn't prevail. Just because you're 11 scientifically smart, doesn't mean you have your act 12 together. And I'll just leave it at that, thanks.

13 (Applause.)

14 MR. CAMERON: Thank you, Mr. Williams.

15 Shawn Banfield.

16 MS. BANFIELD: Good afternoon. My name is 17 Shawn Banfield and I'm here today as an active member 18 and an Officer of the Board of Director for the 19 Vermont Energy Partnership.

20 I'd first like to thank the NRC for 21 hosting this meeting today. I do have a prepared 22 statement, which I will read from. And I'll start 23 with the Vermont Energy Partnership was founded in 24 2005, shortly after the state report warned the series 25 of energy challenges they will face in Vermont.

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

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

56 1 Our founding members came together because 2 they recognized the importance of making sure we have 3 adequate electricity, so Vermont continues to be a 4 great place to live and work.

5 The Partnership is a diverse group of more 6 than 50 business, labor, community leaders, committed 7 to addressing the immense electricity supply issues 8 that we are going to face in Vermont, in the very near 9 future.

10 Our members include a cross-section of 11 experts of the energy sector. Our members employ 12 thousands of Vermonters. They run big and small 13 businesses.

14 They represent Union workers, some of whom 15 devote their professional lives to upgrading the 16 Vermont Yankee Plant safely. The Partnership fully 17 supports the re-licensing of the Vermont Yankee 18 Nuclear Power Plant in Vernon, and I will explain to 19 you why.

20 It is no secret that Vermont's demand for 21 energy is continuing to grow. It may be a less known 22 fact, however, that Vermont faces uncertainty over its 23 future energy supply.

24 Currently, one-third of Vermont's electric 25 supply comes from Hydro Quebec. These long-term NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

57 1 contracts with the state will begin to expire in 2014, 2 and there is no guarantee that these contracts will 3 either be renewed or renegotiated given the company's, 4 Hydro Quebec's more local business opportunities in 5 the province.

6 Another approximate one-third of our 7 supply here in Vermont, is made up of a wide array of 8 both in-state and out-of-state sources, renewable and 9 non-renewable.

10 The Partnership supports the in-state 11 development of renewable sources, and we encourage the 12 increased used of energy efficiency in the expansion 13 on conservation measures.

14 However, the fact remains a reliable 15 energy portfolio, here in Vermont, must be made up 16 elsewhere, of base load sources of power. Vermont 17 Yankee accounts for the last one-third of our Vermont 18 portfolio.

19 About 34 percent of Vermont's total 20 electricity supply needs are met by the Vermont Yankee 21 Plant. So let me put this debate into proper context.

22 Vermont has not brought on a single, significant power 23 generating facility in over 20 years.

24 And there are no plans to do so in the 25 near term. To make matters worse, proposals to NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

58 1 develop small scale generation in Vermont, have been 2 met with sharp criticism and serious opposition. In 3 a time when energy costs are at their highest, Vermont 4 Yankee will not only play an essential role in our 5 state's energy portfolio, it is critically important 6 to the Vermont economy and environment.

7 From an economic standpoint, I would just 8 quickly say that a stable, relatively low-cost power 9 provider will help to maintain and expand businesses 10 here in Vermont, while at the same time providing for 11 an opportunity to bring and attract new businesses to 12 the state.

13 In a time where Vermont faces an 14 increasing, aging population, the plant provides 15 employment to 600 highly skilled men and women. These 16 individuals and the company provide more than 200 17 million in economic benefits to the Windham County 18 Region and the state as a whole.

19 According to the Vermont Public Board, I'm 20 sorry, the Public Service Department, the company, 21 through the State's Power Purchase Agreement, will 22 provide customers in Vermont, approximately 250 23 million dollars in savings over the life of the 24 contract.

25 But aside from the important economic NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

59 1 benefits, the Vermont Yankee's continued operation, 2 I'm sorry, there are also some relative environmental 3 benefits from this in-state power generation source.

4 In 2005, alone, according to the Nuclear 5 Energy Institute, Vermont Yankee avoided emissions of 6 7,700 tons of sulphur dioxide, 2,000 tons of nitrogen 7 oxides, and 2.5 million tons of carbon dioxide.

8 Emissions of sulphur dioxide, lead to the 9 formation of acid rain. Nitrogen oxide is the 10 precursor to both ground-level ozone and smog. And 11 greenhouse gases, like carbon dioxide, contribute to 12 global warming.

13 We live in a country where half the 14 electricity generated comes from coal-burning sources.

15 Yet, in Vermont, we can be very proud to say that 16 that's not the case.

17 Vermont Yankee does not release harmful 18 greenhouse gases or other toxins into the atmosphere 19 which are the primary cause for global warming. The 20 issue of global warming, a climate change, has rapidly 21 reached alarming levels.

22 And power-generated facilities have been 23 at the heart of that crisis. In the United States, 24 coal is the leading power provider with over 600 25 plants operating.

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

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

60 1 Of these plants, of the 600 plants, 36 2 percent of all U.S. emissions are accounted by those 3 plants' generation. It has become abundantly clear 4 that the nuclear energy is the only emission-free 5 source that can meet consumer demand, reliably and at 6 a reasonable cost.

7 Leading environmentalists, from around the 8 world, like Dr. Patrick Moore, Co-Founder of Green 9 Peace, have come to the conclusion that nuclear power 10 is the only source that can help remedy and save the 11 planet from catastrophic climate change.

12 Just last month, Dr. Moore said in the 13 Washington Post, nuclear energy is the only large 14 scale, cost effective energy source that can reduce 15 these emissions, while continuing to satisfy the 16 growing demand for power.

17 And these days, in these days it can do so 18 safely. He went on to say that it's extremists who 19 fail to consider the enormous and obvious benefits of 20 nuclear power, also fail to understand that nuclear 21 energy is practical, safe and environmentally 22 friendly.

23 Without Vermont Yankee, Vermont utilities 24 would be forced to buy additional power on the spot 25 market that would be less reliable and certainly NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

61 1 considerably more expensive.

2 So the Partnership asks, do Vermonters 3 really want to pay more and to depend on power from 4 fossil fuel sources, such as natural gas and coal, 5 which contribute to the global warming and the earth's 6 degradation?

7 The Vermont Partnership thinks not. In 8 closing, the Vermont Yankee has an important and 9 crucial role to play in the future of your state.

10 It is both environmentally and 11 economically appropriate to grant the plant a license 12 extension. We know that there is a wide array of 13 support for the continued operation of this plant, for 14 the reasons I have articulated here today.

15 Its essential economic benefits. Its 16 environmentally sound operations, and its important 17 role as a component of the Vermont energy portfolio.

18 On behalf of the Partnership, we would 19 like to thank you for taking the time to hear from us 20 today.

21 MR. CAMERON: Thank you, Shawn. Is Dan 22 MacArthur here? Dan.

23 MR. MACARTHUR: Hi, my name is Dan 24 MacArthur, I'm the Emergency Management Director for 25 the town of Marlboro. I want to make several points NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

62 1 here.

2 First of all, Marlboro has actually, is 3 one of those formal petitions for hearing that the NRC 4 should have received, and we are requesting that 5 Marlboro be included in the EPZ.

6 It's the only town with any property 7 within the ten mile radius, which was not included 8 when the original license was granted in the 1960s, I 9 guess. And we are formally requesting that if there 10 is going to be an extension of the license, that the 11 license be changed so that Marlboro can be included.

12 It's only fair, and there's no, as far as 13 we're concerned, there's no other possible way to 14 reconfigure the EPZ. I've drawn a little map of it 15 and I will, if the current license that the NRC has 16 granted to Vermont Yankee shows a really funny shaped 17 EPZ with Marlboro just completely hacked out of it.

18 So we would like to be included in that, 19 and that will be part of an ongoing formal request 20 that we have. As for the purpose of the meeting here 21 today, the environmental scoping, I'd like to follow 22 up a little bit on comments that Ray Shadis made and 23 Chris Williams, as well.

24 We, there's many of us in the local 25 citizenry know that our environment, our homes, our NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

63 1 farms, our entire livelihood are at risk here. If 2 there's ever a sizeable release of radioactivity, then 3 our property values will plummet. Our ability to 4 sell, possibly even eat our own produce, will be 5 diminished.

6 And I can't imagine a greater 7 environmental impact than that. I mean we're talking 8 about all or nothing, here. And I don't know whether 9 you want to try to do a mathematical analysis of all 10 or nothing, or not.

11 But from my perspective, it doesn't make 12 any sense. If there's any possibility, that there's 13 going to be any kind of impact like that, then I think 14 that the NRC can only include that in the 15 environmental scoping.

16 And this goes on. I understand that the 17 NRC is only looking at environmental impact until the 18 year 2032, but that doesn't do much good for those of 19 us who live in this area, and I think more and more 20 are coming to grips with the fact that the waste 21 that's being generated is going to be stored here, in 22 our backyard.

23 And it's going to be incredibly dangerous 24 for thousands of years. So, unless the NRC can 25 promise us that we aren't going to be the ones who NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

64 1 monitor that material, then we're going to have to 2 insist that the effect of that material be included in 3 any environmental scoping review.

4 (Applause.)

5 MR. MACARTHUR: As I said earlier, I can't 6 imagine any greater environmental impact, and I can't 7 imagine the NRC extending the license if there's any 8 possibility of this happening.

9 I was interested, the person before me was 10 going through the benefits of nuclear energy, but, as 11 we all know, there are many, many hidden costs 12 included in producing energy from nuclear power.

13 One of them being that there is a sizeable 14 payroll at the Federal level, paid for by our taxes, 15 which is specifically for the purpose of seeing that 16 nuclear energy continues to operate fairly cheaply.

17 So just think of that. The people who are 18 here today getting paid by us, the citizenry, we're 19 paying for that in our taxes, but it's really a cost 20 that should be associated with the electric costs of 21 nuclear power.

22 Now somebody asked earlier, how many 23 people are here from the NRC. And it occurred to me 24 and I think this is the reason that you're all here 25 today, is to try to establish some sort of comfort NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

65 1 level with those of us who live here, with the fact 2 that there is in fact a good and a quality oversight 3 of this process.

4 I, my question is this. There are 5 approximately 25 people here who work for the NRC now.

6 Of those 25 people, and I was at all of the previous 7 meetings and I heard distinguished scientists stand up 8 and say well I worked in the nuclear industry, and now 9 I work for the NRC.

10 Of the people here today, who work for the 11 NRC, how many people have been in the nuclear industry 12 and are currently working for NRC? I wonder if we 13 could have a show of hands on that?

14 MR. CAMERON: Dan, I'm sure that some of 15 our people have worked for the nuclear industry, 16 others have not. But we're not going to conduct a 17 poll right now, okay?

18 So if you could finish up with your 19 comments, we'd appreciate it.

20 MR. MACARTHUR: I don't think I need to say 21 anymore. That seems to have said it very well, 22 thanks.

23 (Applause.)

24 MR. CAMERON: I don't think it did say it 25 fairly well, but I did have a question for you, to NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

66 1 make sure that your request, formal request that 2 Marlboro be considered in the Emergency Planning Zone.

3 I want to make sure that doesn't get lost, and you 4 said you had filed a Petition to Intervene and that 5 there would be perhaps something other coming in as a 6 formal request.

7 Should we, should we consider your 8 comments today the formal request, or is there another 9 written request that's going to follow? I guess 10 that's my question for you, just so that I know what, 11 we know what to respond to.

12 MR. MACARTHUR: Yeah, thanks. I will ask 13 that you include my today's comments as a follow up to 14 that request. I also understood that having 15 petitioned by the 27th of May, or whatever it was, 16 that we wouldn't need to follow up.

17 Just today's comments are just to 18 reinforce our official request, which I believe has 19 already gone in. So if there's more needed, let me 20 know.

21 MR. CAMERON: Okay, and the reason that I 22 wanted to distinguish this, is that your request to 23 participate in the Hearing and the request to be part 24 of the Emergency Planning Zone, can also be treated 25 separately, so that if your Petition to Intervene, is NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

67 1 not granted, that your request is still before the 2 agency to be part of the Emergency Planning. John, 3 and okay. John, do you have something to say on that?

4 John Eads.

5 MR. EADS: Sure, let me just acknowledge th 6 first that by letter dated April 27 , the town of 7 Marlboro submitted a request, as they put it a 8 Petition for a hearing.

9 That request was postmarked by envelope, 10 I think it was May 15th. I don't know the two week 11 time difference there, but we did receive your 12 request.

13 It did not specify that it was submitted 14 in accordance with 2.309, which is the formal hearing 15 request process. I know that it was addressed to the 16 Secretary for their review, and I believe it's under 17 the review process as we speak.

18 I don't know that it fell under the formal 19 Petition for Hearing Process, submitted in accordance 20 with 2.309, which was specified in the Federal 21 Register Notice.

22 But we did receive your letter dated April 23 27th, and it is being processed.

24 MR. CAMERON: Okay, and we heard your 25 additional request today. Okay. Is Claire Chang with NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

68 1 us? Okay, let's go to, how about Sunny Miller and 2 Ischa Williams next. Sunny Miller? Ischa Williams?

3 (No response.)

4 MR. CAMERON: Okay, Elizabeth Wood? And 5 let's go to, let's go to Bill Burton. Bill?

6 MR. BURTON: Good afternoon. My name is 7 Bill Burton, I'm not an expert on energy, but I have 8 had some experience dealing with energy.

9 I'm a retired educator. I taught Physics, 10 Chemistry, Environmental Science, and a course 11 entitled Energy Economics and the Environment, for 12 about 35 years.

13 I taught in the public schools in Bellows 14 Falls(Phonetic), Vermont. I also did some teaching in 15 the Vermont State College System, and have been a 16 visiting lecturer at the University of Massachusetts, 17 Lowell.

18 I'm probably one of the few people here 19 from Windham County that endorses the re-licensing of 20 Vermont Yankee, and its, and hopefully looks upon with 21 the environmental issues, favorably.

22 In my experience as an energy teacher, I 23 probably visited almost every conceivable form of 24 electrical energy generation that exists. I've been 25 to large nuclear plants, coal-fired plants, oil-fired NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

69 1 plants, wood chip, solar, wind. You name it, I've 2 been there to learn more about the issues.

3 I feel that in any electrical generation, 4 no matter what type of process you are using, there 5 are benefits and risks. And I firmly believe that the 6 benefits of nuclear power, greatly exceed the risks.

7 I know a lot of you are in disagreement.

8 The main reason that I feel this way is other than 9 hydro-electric power, all of the other forms of 10 electrical generation involve carbon fuels.

11 Either coal, oil, natural gas, biomass, 12 you name it. All of these are going to produce gases 13 that are going to be harmful to the environment. They 14 are going to produce greenhouse gases.

15 And I know some people don't believe in 16 global warming, certainly the President of the United 17 States doesn't agree about global warming, but it does 18 exist. And I originally came from the state of Maine, 19 where we used to go fishing a lot in northern lakes.

20 Now there are no fish. Acid rain from 21 coal-fired plants. In those coal-fired plants there 22 is also -- I heard a comment from someone?

23 Would you like to come up and make, I 24 don't believe I bothered you while you were making 25 your comments, right, sir?

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

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

70 1 MR. CAMERON: Okay.

2 MR. BURTON: Okay, thank you.

3 MR. CAMERON: All right.

4 MR. BURTON: All right. I knew the people 5 when they were called the Clam Shell Alliance, way 6 back.

7 All right, now getting back to the issues 8 that I want to deal with, I've been involved with a 9 lot of environmental issues. I'd like to consider 10 myself an Environmentalist.

11 Many of my students lived off the grid.

12 I've had students that have driven in wood-fired cars.

13 I have students who are living in straw houses. So 14 I've seen it all, and I believe that we have to have 15 nuclear power in order to exist, especially here in 16 the Northeast.

17 When I started teaching, oil was $2.00 a 18 barrel, now it's $70 something. When I was heating my 19 house with oil, it used to be 16 cents a gallon. I 20 pre-bought for $2.76 the other day. So the cost of 21 these fossil fuels that we use here in the Northeast, 22 are increasing so that I feel this year, many people 23 in Vermont, are going to freeze to death.

24 It's just going to be pretty bad when you 25 have to burn 1,000 gallons of oil in your house and NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

71 1 it's going to cost almost $3.00 a gallon. Who is 2 going to be able to afford it?

3 We've had no national energy policy.

4 We're talking about 20 years down the road. That's 5 short-term, 40 years down the road is short-term. I 6 started out dealing with energy in 1962, and one of my 7 students made a hydrogen fuel cell, that's how I got 8 enlightened in this thing.

9 1962, that's a lot of years ago. And I've 10 been involved in learning about energy for all these 11 years. All right, now, what's going to happen? I 12 really feel we not only need to re-license Vermont 13 Yankee, but we need more nuclear power plants 14 throughout the country.

15 Because fossil fuels are going to 16 diminish. China wants them, everybody else wants 17 them. They're polluting the atmosphere. They're 18 going to kill the earth in just a very, very few 19 decades.

20 Now with nuclear power we have the ability 21 to get the fuel right here in North America. We can 22 use nuclear power to generate electricity. We can use 23 nuclear power to electrolyze water and get hydrogen.

24 And hydrogen is going to be the fuel of the future.

25 And granted, there's a lot of things about NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

72 1 getting hydrogen from the source, the production, to 2 its use. It's a very small molecule, but we can drive 3 cars with hydrogen. We can heat with hydrogen, you 4 can do a lot of things.

5 So once we get a long-term energy policy, 6 it doesn't matter if you're a Republican or Democrat, 7 I don't know when it's going to come down the road, 8 but we need a long-term energy policy with nuclear 9 power, and hydrogen replacing gasoline.

10 Because I know, right here in town, we 11 have soybean oil for diesel and people are burning it.

12 That's fine, you're not using gasoline, but you're 13 polluting the atmosphere, just the same, with those 14 greenhouse gases.

15 So I'm convinced that we need a long-term 16 policy and I hope that some, it won't be in my 17 lifetime, but I guaranteed if you can look forward, 18 150 years from now, you're going to be driving around 19 in your hydrogen cars.

20 That's all I have to say, oh, by the way, 21 concerning fishing and so forth. I spent the last 22 weekend stocking salmon in the tributaries of the 23 Connecticut River, so I'm not, you know, a polluter.

24 I'm an Environmentalist, I'm a Fisherman, but I am 25 concerned about our energy future, not only in Vermont NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

73 1 but the United States. Thank you.

2 MR. CAMERON: Okay, thank you very much, 3 Mr. Burton. How about Mr. English, then Bernie 4 Buteau, and Dan Jeffries. Is Bob English here? Okay, 5 this is Mr. Robert English.

6 MR. ENGLISH: Hello. About 30 years ago 7 the Union of Concerned Scientists developed a program 8 that provided the way that the United States could be 9 70 percent solar-powered by the year 2000. Well, here 10 it's 2006, and we're talking about energy problems and 11 energy shortages.

12 Well, for the last 25 years, I've lived in 13 a solar home that I built, and I've lived off the grid 14 with solar electricity from portable tag panels. If 15 you came into my house, you wouldn't notice much 16 difference from your house.

17 I have computers, I have monitors, I have 18 televisions, I have a microwave. I have a washing 19 machine. I cook on electric hot plates in the summer 20 and I cook on a wood cook stove in the winter. I 21 don't use any oil to heat my house.

22 So when people tell you that we need to 23 risk the very ground that we stand on, that we need to 24 risk making it uninhabitable for 15 generations, in 25 order to heat our homes and have electricity, it NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

74 1 simply isn't true.

2 (Applause.)

3 MR. ENGLISH: Technologically we can solve 4 energy problems, we can do it without destroying the 5 environment. The problem is political and social. We 6 need to say we want renewable energy, we are not 7 willing to pay the price of the destruction of the 8 earth, to heat our homes.

9 We do not need to do that. Thank you.

10 (Applause.)

11 MR. CAMERON: Thank you, Mr. English. Is 12 Bernie here, Mr. Buteau, I'm not sure I'm pronouncing 13 that correctly.

14 (No response.)

15 MR. CAMERON: Okay, how about Mr. Jeffries, 16 Dan Jeffries? And Ted Sullivan? John Dreyfus?

17 (No response.)

18 MR. CAMERON: Okay, Carol, Carol Boyer. I 19 think Carol is here, isn't she? Carol, do you want to 20 come down and talk to us?

21 MS. BOYER: Hello, everyone, can you hear 22 me. This is my first experience attending a hearing 23 of this sort, and I had actually not planned to speak.

24 What I would like to say is to build on 25 what the last speaker described, which is his NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

75 1 experience living with a solar home.

2 I'm imagining how good it must feel to 3 know that you're meeting your basic needs without 4 adding anything to the debt that we, as humans, have 5 accumulated in our attempts to meet our needs, and 6 also in our, really, we're so full of ideas and we can 7 do so many things, we seem to have lost track of our 8 relationship to the larger circle of life.

9 And I would like to suggest that we follow 10 up and that each of us become responsible for learning 11 that, for example, our own Department of Energy has 12 very firm studies that clearly tell us that if we 13 exerted the political and social will, we would have 14 no need for any of the risky enterprises that we use 15 now to meet our needs for energy and heat.

16 I'm not going to repeat what was just said 17 about the time table on this, but I would like to say, 18 say it this way. That we need to be forward thinking.

19 And my sense is that nuclear power is kind of passe.

20 We've all looked at this. We see what the 21 risks are, and there are huge chunks in Russia that 22 have been, in their terms, withdrawn from public use, 23 for the foreseeable future because of an accident.

24 And, as far as I know, nobody has repealed 25 Murphy's Law. So I'd like to suggest that we 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

76 1 responsible and that we get this message today that we 2 are asking all of you to look beyond what has become 3 an old mantra, and make use of the truly up-to-date 4 technology, that could allow all of us to feel good 5 about living our lives without adding to the 6 environmental burdens. Thank you.

7 (Applause.)

8 MR. CAMERON: We thank you, Carol. Nancy, 9 Nancy Nelkin.

10 MS. NELKIN: Hi, I'm Nancy Nelkin, I'm from 11 Western Mass, I'm an educator. I guess I wanted to 12 start out with the comment, I think it was Rich. He 13 said something about us being, referring to us as the 14 public experts.

15 That was flattering, however, I think 16 there are really only a few true experts among us, 17 like Ray Shadis. I think part of the problem is, as 18 taxpayers, we're paying the NRC as our employees, to 19 be the knowledgeable representatives of public 20 interest.

21 The NRC is responsible for overseeing the 22 nuclear industry. And when they do a poor job, they 23 risk our health and well being, when you do not 24 rigorously and objectively evaluate the impacts of 25 nuclear power on us.

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

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

77 1 And my understanding with this license 2 renewal process, there's a safety review. And you're 3 talking about looking at aging management. And I 4 still ask when will you determine when a nuclear plant 5 is not environmentally or otherwise, fit to continue.

6 I get the feeling that as long as you can 7 put a band aid on this or tighten a screw here, that 8 you will continue to run the nuclear reactors, which 9 really has more benefits for the corporations that run 10 them, than for us, as the people who live in the area.

11 Because we have to live with the effects 12 on the Connecticut River. We have to live with the 13 effects on our health, increased cancers. These are 14 things that need to be looked seriously, by the NRC, 15 in this process.

16 Not to mention the nuclear waste that's 17 stored in our backyard. It's bad enough that it's 18 already there, it's at risk by an accident. It's at 19 risk by criminal act.

20 And the company is resisting taking 21 measures to make that more safe. I want that to be 22 considered in this process. And if we continue to re-23 license the plant, we will have that much more nuclear 24 waste.

25 In fact, it will be, the nuclear waste NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

78 1 will reach its capacity and go beyond. I want to add 2 that I question this assumption that we need more and 3 more energy and that the only choices are centralized 4 forms of energy that use fossil fuels, coal that uses, 5 uranium.

6 This is not an automatic assumption. One 7 aspect of this renewal, as I understand it, is to 8 consider alternatives. And I want to ask my 9 neighbors, who live in this area, to really look 10 seriously at alternatives.

11 There are so many renewable options.

12 There's solar, there's wind, and people have a way of 13 making it sound like, oh, well you know you really 14 can't do that, that's not practical. That's not true.

15 It's very practical, it's very doable.

16 This is an article that's very low researched. It's 17 being done in other countries. It's being done in 18 Western Europe.

19 People are putting solar panels on their 20 homes and getting paid by the utility for producing 21 that electricity. So we need to open our minds and 22 not get into an either/or situation where people 23 saying well coal plants are so bad for the environment 24 and it's making, causing global warming.

25 So we have to run the other way to NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

79 1 nuclear. You have to really think hard about all of 2 the nuclear waste that's going to be with us forever.

3 And will Entergy be with us forever.

4 Will they be footing the bill to take care 5 of that, forever. As long as it takes for the 6 radiation to dissipate.

7 So I just, I'm pleading with the NRC to 8 take a really objective and rigorous approach to this.

9 I think that, you know, all of the areas that we have 10 to look at are out there. Thank you.

11 (Applause.)

12 MR. CAMERON: Thank you, Nancy. Is Mike 13 Hame here, by any chance? Or a Mr. Peyton?

14 (No response.)

15 MR. CAMERON: Let's go to, Sally, Sally 16 Shaw, do you want to talk?

17 MS. SHAW: (off mic.)

18 MR. CAMERON: Thank you, Sally, for 19 sending, you're going to send the comments and then 20 we'll go to Sally, Sally Shaw, thank you.

21 MS. SHAW: In the interest of full 22 disclosure, I work for New England Coalition, but I'm 23 speaking here today as a Resident of the ten mile EPZ.

24 I live in Gill, Massachusetts.

25 As an ecologist, I'm compelled to point NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

80 1 out that environmental impacts are multi-variate 2 impacts. They are not generic. Life is not generic.

3 And although biological systems are resilient and they 4 recover from damage, radiation exposure causes genetic 5 impacts that will change life forever.

6 Genetic damage can be passed on to our 7 offspring and theirs. It can change biological 8 communities forever. I submit that the very idea of 9 a GEIS is sheis. In NRC's Executive Summary of their 10 Generic Environmental Impact Statement, which I 11 consider an oxymoron.

12 They state that among the 150 million 13 people who live within 50 miles of a U.S. Nuclear 14 Power Plant, I prefer to call it a reactor, not a 15 plant. About 30 million who will die of spontaneous 16 cancers.

17 That's one in five people, by their 18 calculations. And they say that since we can't prove 19 a one of them was caused by radiation, therefore the 20 NRC doesn't have to worry about them, note bene.

21 They admit that five calculated fatalities 22 associated with nuclear powered induced cancers will 23 occur. So I ask which one of us, or our children, 24 living within 50 miles, will die of radiation induced 25 cancer, over the lifetime of this plant.

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

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

81 1 That's the cost of progress. Tough luck, 2 sucker. Most of the people who die of radiation 3 induced cancers, will live within ten miles.

4 Thus, there's a very good possibility that 5 we will know, we in this room, will know some of them.

6 At last count, my husband and I counted, between us, 7 28 people we know who have died or are living with 8 cancer, in our extended community.

9 Can I prove that their cancers are 10 radiation related? No. Therefore, the effects, the 11 impact of these deaths, on our life, is considered by 12 the NRC to be of small significance.

13 The Executive Summary of the 600 some odd 14 page Environmental Impact Statement, is full of little 15 items like that. Here's another. The staff concludes 16 that the generic analysis of a severe accident, 17 applies to all reactors.

18 The probability weighted consequences of 19 atmospheric releases fall out onto open bodies of 20 water, groundwater releases and the societal and 21 economic impacts are of small significance, for all 22 reactors.

23 That, with the stroke of a pen, wipes out 24 all our concerns. They also conclude that the 25 environmental impacts of design-basis accidents, are NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

82 1 of small significance for all plants.

2 And, because additional measures to reduce 3 such impacts would be costly, don't worry, they won't 4 burden the Licensee with extra mitigations.

5 At a recent ACRS hearing in Rockville, 6 Maryland, NRC staff, I think maybe it was NRR staff, 7 testified that in a design-basis accident or loss of 8 cooling accident, under upgraded conditions, which 9 they're not looking at, of course, with this re-10 licensing thing.

11 The entire quantity of the core would be 12 released in about 30 seconds. And accident impacts 13 after uprate, are greater than the 20 percent uprate, 14 they may approach 40 percent, maybe more.

15 And this might result in a 500 roentgen 16 exposure at the limiting location, which happens to be 17 very near a residence, which happens to be on the 18 plant perimeter.

19 I submit that such an accident would have 20 a significant impact on the person or family living 21 there. So I would ask the NRC to recalculate. That 22 goes on and on, I'm going to skip.

23 In the Appendices of the GEIS, your 24 estimates of risk quantities, for early fatalities, 25 normalized doses and cost, were made using an aptly NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

83 1 named crack code. We know about cracks.

2 Our steam dryer has 62 of them, at last 3 count. And it uses the middle year of current 4 license, or the flat part of the bathtub curve that 5 nuclear scientists know represent the stability or the 6 stable running of nuclear plants.

7 Experience shows that Vermont Yankee 8 exceeded radiation release limits, several times 9 during the early part of its life. Theory predicts, 10 as it ages, it will release more again.

11 NRC variances, such as doubling the 12 allowable main steam line leak rate, exempting Entergy 13 from doing the ten-year primary containment leak rate 14 test that was supposed to have been done in 2005.

15 All of that implies to me that the theory 16 is correct, and they don't want to find out. And then 17 there's the small fact that Entergy is negotiating 18 with Vermont and the NRC to mask their actual 19 releases, with a 29 percent discount.

20 That's been discussed at other meetings.

21 I think the jury is still out on that one, but I can 22 take a really good guess how it will go. I propose to 23 the NRC that you come up with a more realistic way to 24 model dose, since the bathtub is overflowing and with 25 the uprate and the license extension, you're going NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

84 1 beyond the rim of the bathtub.

2 So your middle year of current license 3 criteria, seems to me, flawed. New and significant 4 information.

5 I would like to submit the BEIR 7 Report 6 of the National Academy of Sciences. The biological 7 effects of ionizing radiation. The National Academy 8 of Sciences told us that, in fact, there is not a 9 threshold dose phenomenon.

10 The GEIS presupposes a threshold dose 11 phenomenon. Therefore, it claims that it does make 12 sense to normalize early fatalities. That's based on 13 the BEIR 5 Report, not BEIR 7.

14 I would like to suggest that you 15 recalculate using the conclusions of BEIR 7. What 16 does BEIR 7 say about radiation risks to workers under 17 exposure of one REM per year. That was another little 18 nugget in the Appendices of the GEIS.

19 I'm just curious. I would love to see 20 that calculated. I think your Appendix E.4.1.2 is 21 faulty, also based on BEIR 7, because it's based on 22 the notion of a threshold of effects. That does not 23 seem to be the case.

24 Your Appendices E.8.2, these Appendices 25 show the tables and the calculations behind a lot of NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

85 1 their conclusions in the GEIS.

2 Quantities and units, assumes non-3 stochastic effects will not occur if the dose 4 equivalent from internal and external sources 5 combined, is less than 50 rems or fewer in a year.

6 This, too, contradicts the conclusions of 7 the BEIR 7 Study. Your cost estimates also use BEIR 8 5, not 7, and the costs are based on 1980 costs, or 9 maybe they were updated to 1994, 12 years ago.

10 In my experience, prices have changed 11 quite a bit in that 12 years. The other thing, 12 quarrel I have with your cost estimates, is that you 13 skip Indian Point, hypothetical accident costs for 14 Indian Point.

15 I don't blame the NRC for skipping Indian 16 Point. Lots of folks live down there. The cost of an 17 accident would be astronomical, but it's not good 18 science to leave out a big outlier like that, in this 19 case.

20 I would just like to pause for a second, 21 to say this is really crazy. No other power 22 generation source comes close to having to expend so 23 much money and so much energy, just to convince us 24 that it won't kill thousands of us.

25 If Entergy, Excelon and others just NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

86 1 invested in wind and solar, none of this would be 2 necessary.

3 (Applause.)

4 MS. SHAW: I do hope that you will consider 5 that possibility in your NEPA required look at 6 alternatives to re-licensing ENVY.

7 The tax-funded labor costs of the NRC, 8 ACRS, ASLB, etcetera, etcetera, would be eliminated.

9 Please, save our tax dollars, we need them. In 10 Appendix E, I think it was Page E-43, we talk about 11 ALARA limits.

12 That stands for As Low As Reasonably 13 Achievable. These are radiation exposure limits for 14 workers. And they were derived using analytic 15 techniques to identify the approximate point at which 16 the cost of providing additional protection, would 17 exceed the risk averted.

18 You see, it sounds like apples and oranges 19 to me, so I'm just curious what, this is a question, 20 I guess I missed the question part, I should have 21 asked it then.

22 But what dollar value do you place on a 23 workers life? I'm just curious. I guess I'll 24 conclude with saying that it seems to me that your 25 Generic Environmental Impact Statement is fatally NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

87 1 flawed, in many ways.

2 Recalculations of early fatalities and 3 latent fatalities, are biased. They are based on old 4 information, BEIR 5, not BEIR 7, and I humbly request 5 that you recalculate them based on the most currently 6 available knowledge on the effects of radiation.

7 Particularly, low level radiation. Thank 8 you, Chip.

9 MR. CAMERON: Thank you, Sally.

10 (Applause.)

11 MR. CAMERON: Could we, could we have 12 someone from the NRC staff answer Sally's question?

13 Not right now, but at the end of the meeting. She has 14 a question, if anybody can answer that for her, I 15 would appreciate it.

16 Our next speakers are going to be, first 17 we're going to go to Mandy Arms, then to Sally Kotkov, 18 and then to Bill Wittmer. Mandy? Okay, how about 19 Sarah, Sarah Kotkov? And then we'll go to Mr.

20 Wittmer.

21 MR. KOTKOV: Hi, I'm on the Board of New 22 England Coalition, but my comments are my own personal 23 views. At the outset, Rani said that, apologized for 24 the weather. And I like to say that I don't think the 25 that the weather is the reason that a larger number of NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

88 1 people have not come out this afternoon.

2 I think that many of us are quite 3 disgusted by the fact that the Atomic Safety and 4 Licensing Board has recently refused to hear, or 5 refused to accept the contentions, the new contentions 6 of New England Coalition, based solely on their lack 7 of timeliness in filing.

8 And yet, in a few weeks, we'll have 9 another one of these public meetings. We think that 10 these decisions, the decisions on uprate and on re-11 licensing, are based, and should be based on science 12 and engineering, and to have a show of soliciting the 13 views of the citizens, many of us believe is a sham 14 and a travesty and I think that is why people have not 15 shown up today, not because it's a little bit rainy.

16 As a citizen living here in Guilford, 17 frankly I didn't think much about the power plant 18 until 9/11, and then I thought a lot about the fuel 19 pool and the risk of terrorism here.

20 Frankly, my only hope is that a terrorist 21 would find this area too boring. The NRC, I think, 22 thinks that the low population density here is a 23 reason not to pay more attention to the safety of this 24 outdated and aging structure.

25 The Mark 1 containment requires that the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

89 1 fuel pool be high up in the air, where it is not 2 shielded by being below grade, as some other plants 3 are. Here it's 70 feet in the air and it's, of 4 course, highly vulnerable to attack by aircraft. When 5 this plant was built, it was intended to hold the 6 fuel, what's called spent fuel, which is, of course, 7 highly, highly radioactive and dangerous.

8 It was intended to hold this fuel for six 9 months. Now, of course, there's 33 years of fuel in 10 the pool, there will be another seven by the time the 11 license expires.

12 And now we are looking at the prospect of 13 another 20 years beyond that, of fuel. And, of 14 course, when the fuel, after the fuel is in the pool 15 for five years, and then it's cooled sufficiently to 16 put in dry casks, we're looking at the prospect of 17 many, many more casks on the banks of the Connecticut 18 River, where this, of course, also a terrorist target.

19 Especially if Entergy gets its way and 20 does not even have to provide berms around the casks.

21 And, of course, there's also a flooding danger. In 22 1991, there was a study regarding the construction of 23 a low-level waste repository down on the plant 24 grounds, and it was deemed not wise.

25 Now we're, of course, looking at high NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

90 1 level waste on the plant grounds. I think that's all 2 I have to say, thank you.

3 (Applause.)

4 MR. CAMERON: Thank you. We're going to go 5 to Mr. Wittmer, then Joyce Morin, then Linda Madkom.

6 Is Mr. Wittmer still here?

7 (No response.)

8 MR. CAMERON: Okay, how about Joyce Morin?

9 Mr. Madkom?

10 (No response.)

11 MR. CAMERON: Gary? Gary Sachs. And then 12 after Gary we'll go to Ann Elizabeth Howes. Gary 13 Sachs.

14 MR. SACHS: Nuclear is not cheap 15 electricity. Protect the waste for 100,000 years, 16 tell us how much that's going to cost. Spend some of 17 that money to protect that waste, and then tell us 18 it's cheap, affordable or inexpensive electricity.

19 I challenge you on that. To anyone who 20 claims that there was a benefit to nuclear power, 21 please show me this cost benefit analysis, including 22 the price of dealing with this waste.

23 Because the rate we're given as for the 24 power purchase agreement, from 2002, does not tell us 25 the true cost of the economics behind this.

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

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

91 1 It was great for you to hear Ms. Banfield 2 refer to the Department of Public Service Studies. I 3 intend tonight, at tonight's meeting, to bring more 4 economic data on how that Department of Public Service 5 Study breaks down and to actually how much per person 6 that will cost, if we didn't have Vermont Yankee 7 starting in this year or in a couple of years.

8 And one of my concerns, when I hear the 9 NRC at this meeting, in regard to the data that they 10 use for their studies, is that they take much of their 11 data, not from their own sources, but from the 12 Licensee. And, in my opinion, that's poor practice.

13 (Applause.)

14 MR. SACHS: For those people here, who have 15 less experience than some of us who live locally, 16 who've been following this issue for quite a while, 17 this re-licensing issue is actually about no moving 18 parts.

19 It's not about dry cask storage. It's not 20 about the uprate. It's not about the evacuation plan.

21 And it's not about any moving parts in the reactor 22 itself. Just so you know.

23 And to relate to that man who spoke 24 earlier, who was the teacher in Bellows Falls. In 25 order for nuclear to cover the carbon-based emissions, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

92 1 better used in coal and in natural gas plants, 2 etcetera, we would have to have a new nuclear power 3 plant built every two weeks, between now and 2050. I 4 don't think that's going to happen, sir.

5 Last Friday, the Ninth Circuit Court in 6 California stated the NRC, in doing these 7 Environmental Impact Statements, must take into 8 account risk of terrorism.

9 And here at Vermont Yankee we have a 10 radioactive water pond, that is 60 feet up, covered by 11 basically an aluminum, corrugated aluminum roof that 12 has a breakaway roof with a pound and a half pressure 13 per square inch.

14 To me that, I'm not sure what level of 15 containment we have at Vermont Yankee, and I'd like 16 that addressed in whatever this Environmental Impact 17 Study is that you all are planning.

18 Richard Monson of the Harvard School of 19 Public Health stated, quote, the scientific research 20 base shows that there is no threshold below which low 21 levels of ionizing radiation can be demonstrated to be 22 harmless or beneficial.

23 I'm going to repeat that. There is no 24 threshold below which low levels of ionizing radiation 25 can be demonstrated to be harmless or beneficial. The NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

93 1 health risks, particularly the development of solid 2 cancers in organs, rise proportionately with exposure.

3 At low doses of radiation, the risk of inducing solid 4 cancers is very small.

5 As the overall lifetime exposure 6 increases, so does the risk. Every nuclear reactor 7 emits small amounts of radiation. Even, supposedly, 8 zero-emission reactors.

9 On March 31st, 2004, the NRC arrived in 10 Vernon, Vermont to inform us that they would not be 11 performing the independent engineering assessment that 12 had been a requirement, put on the uprate by the State 13 Public Service Board.

14 For anybody who knows that they did do the 15 independent engineering assessment, in my opinion, the 16 NRC is not to be trusted. 5-4-04 the NRC changed its 17 tune and announced that it had long been planning such 18 an independent engineering assessment.

19 You, the NRC, say that Three Mile Island 20 was a wake up call for the industry. That was March 21 28th, 1979. That same year the NRC publicly stated 22 that there was no such thing as a safe amount of 23 radiation.

24 Since 1979, I'm going to list some of the th 25 events that have occurred. February 11 , 1981, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

94 1 Tennessee Valley Authorities, Sequoia One Plant in 2 Tennessee. A rookie operator caused a 110,000 gallon 3 radioactive coolant release.

4 January 25th, `82, the Ginna Plant near 5 Rochester, New York, a steam generator pipe broke.

6 Fifteen thousand gallons of radioactive coolant 7 spilled. Small amounts of radioactive steam escaped 8 into the air.

9 January 15th and 16th, 1983, Brown's Ferry 10 Station. Nearly 208,000 gallons of low level 11 radioactive contaminated water was accidently dumped 12 into the Tennessee River.

13 1981, `82, and `83, Salem One and Two in 14 New Jersey. Ninety seconds from catastrophe when the 15 plant was shut down manually, after the failure of an 16 automatic shut down system.

17 A 3,000 gallon radioactive water leak in 18 June of `81. A 23,000 gallon leak of mildly 19 radioactive water, which splashed onto 16 workers by 20 -the-by, in February of `82.

21 And radioactive gas leaks in March of `81, 22 and September of `82. Then, in 1996, NRC Chairperson 23 Shirley Jackson, speaking of Millstone in Time 24 Magazine, quote, clearly the NRC dropped the ball. We 25 won't do it again.

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

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

95 1 1997, Yankee Rowe, 20 miles of here. In 2 the process of closing it, they determined they had 3 found that they had dumped, for 30 years, radioactive 4 water into the Deerfield River. Many people swim 5 downstream from that river.

th 6 February 15 , 2000, New York's Indian 7 Point Two, aging steam generator ruptured, venting 8 radioactive steam. The NRC initially reported no 9 radioactive material released.

10 They later changed their report to say 11 there was a leak, but not enough to threaten public 12 safety. Wait, didn't the NRC in 1979, say there's no 13 such thing as a safe amount of radiation? Hmm.

14 2004, new NRC Chairman Nils Diaz, about 15 Davis Besse, said the Agency, quote, dropped the ball 16 again. Hmm. A lot of balls getting dropped by the 17 NRC.

18 If Three Mile Island was a wake up call, 19 were you guys asleep at the control panel during these 20 other events, or just napping. I heard someone refer 21 earlier to the fact that Mr. Emch has been involved 22 with the NRC for 30 years.

23 That means he's been involved since before 24 you guys knew what you're doing to apparently the mid 25 to late `80s, when you claimed to have a handle on NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

96 1 these events and not be making mistakes any longer.

2 Okay, so here we are in a NRC meeting.

3 Please tell me how the NRC does not stand for nobody 4 really cares? The environmental impact of Vermont 5 Yankee.

6 We have an ineffective evacuation plan, 7 which has been untested in its entirety. What about 8 those people who don't have vehicles? What about the 9 daycare centers and all the schools being tested 10 together?

11 What about the transient local members in 12 the community who are in hotels? A worst case 13 scenario accident at Vermont Yankee would lead to an 14 area the size of western Mass, Vermont and New 15 Hampshire, being uninhabitable for possibly 30 or more 16 years.

17 The plumes from the National Aeronautics 18 and Atmospherics Administration, shows plumes going as 19 far north as deep into Canada, over Montpelier. As 20 far south as North Carolina, and as far east as over 21 Cape Cod.

22 Getting the Ninth Circuit Court's decision 23 last week, it appears that the NRC has some excuses to 24 make. In 2001, just a month before 9/11, Vermont 25 Yankee failed the Operational Safety Response NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

97 1 Evaluation Drill of the NRC.

2 In this drill, mock attackers, who work 3 for the NRC, tried to enter the Control Room by 4 getting over the fence and past security at Vermont 5 Yankee.

6 Prior to the test, the time and where the 7 mock attackers would be coming from, was told to the 8 Security. The mock attackers were able to enter the 9 Control Room, got past the Security and VY won the 10 notoriety, calling itself the least secure nuclear 11 station in the country.

12 Needless to say, the NRC no longer does 13 that test. I have a question that comes up, that I 14 didn't ask in the beginning of the meeting, which is, 15 on what do you base radiation exposure? Is it the 16 ICRP? International Committee on Radiological 17 Protection?

18 Or is it on the European, on the European 19 Committee on Radiation Risk? Thank you.

20 MR. CAMERON: Okay, thank you, Gary.

21 (Applause.)

22 MR. CAMERON: So that we can go on with 23 other speakers I would just ask, again, if any of the 24 NRC staff has the information about, that Gary is 25 asking about, please talk with him.

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

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

98 1 We have a few more speakers and then I'm 2 going to ask one of the Senior NRC people to close out 3 the afternoon meeting. And I believe this is, this is 4 Ann Elizabeth Howes, and then we're going to go to 5 David McElwee, Debra Reger, and Cora Brooks. Ann 6 Elizabeth.

7 MS. HOWES: I'm a common citizen with 8 relatively low technical education. And I haven't 9 pursued the subject at all.

10 I guess it was last week when we had the 11 17 low level warning system and we had to replace the 12 blower. But, you know, I rarely stay up late and I 13 was watching movies, and at about 5:00 I went upstairs 14 and I could see the dawn approaching and I thought, 15 well, I mean it was probably 4:00.

16 I was feeling, it's dark out. Like we've 17 lost power somewhere, it's very quiet and still. And 18 that's kind of like a tiny, little feeling of fear, 19 but that the experts are taking care of it, and I went 20 to bed as I usually do.

21 And I really think I probably will, I 22 don't really think that I'm an important member of the 23 experience. I kind of compare it to the feelings I 24 had when the World Trade Towers collapsed, that I sort 25 of felt as though I was an American adult and, you NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

99 1 know, with nothing to stress my life.

2 I was experiencing stress, and when the 3 Towers collapsed I felt something has been shut off.

4 And when experiencing a profound natural peace.

5 And I run on little dreams, every once in 6 a while, like an indication in my house, I have a 7 kitchen leak. And I think we had cracks in the blower 8 or something like, cracks in the towers that we had to 9 think about.

10 And I'm like, just a little animal out 11 there and I'm getting the same poetic feeling that 12 there's, you know, stretch marks in the towers and 13 people are concerned about the foundation.

14 And this afternoon I hear, you know, it's 15 sitting on the Connecticut River, and I have an odd 16 dream. That the Connecticut River runs on top of a 17 little shell that is a dirt shell.

18 And that a disruption the size of Vermont 19 Yankee, would cause the river to disappear into a 20 gorge and emerge further downstream. I haven't 21 verified that, though I do think that we're 22 technologically capable enough to check on that.

23 This afternoon is the first time, maybe 24 the second time I've heard that the reactor is 70 feet 25 in the air, which is a decision as to whether or not NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

100 1 any kind of explosion would suck water and dirt into 2 the air and emit, you know, to the hills, but it would 3 probably be buffeted. Like there is a higher rate of 4 survivor-hood, on the other side of the mountains from 5 Hiroshima.

6 That it's at, you're buffeted by the 7 earth. There's one other detail. I feel as though we 8 have gotten excited to secure the strength of the 9 foundation.

10 But I also feel as though it's in our own, 11 honest, personal assessment, as animals working in the 12 reactor, that it's an older, radioactive installation.

13 And my feeling is that we would experience a kind of 14 removal of the radioactive jewelry.

15 A reduction of the vin diagrams of 16 overloaded electromagnetic force fields that is 17 causing a depression of our circulatory systems, our 18 blood chemistry.

19 But if we were to stop the creation of 20 nuclear waste, and stop our mental dependence on 21 extremely bright street lights. Over, hugely over 22 air-conditioned environments and brought our 23 electrical usage, personally at home, down to 24 seriously conservative levels, that we would feel some 25 relaxation of social economic status stress, that is NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

101 1 the equation of the success of industrial America.

2 And it's, you know, you're at that big 3 decision point in your life, where you straighten up 4 and start respecting incredible simplicity, and really 5 learn solar panel.

6 Really contemplate wind farms and harness 7 the hydro-electric potential in the rivers and streams 8 and waterfalls. And gauge down to accepting that as 9 the amount of electricity that you can look at and 10 use.

11 I grew up in the automotive industry, I 12 don't drive a car. I haven't gotten it together. But 13 I know that I have to respect the integrity of the 14 industry, the transport of food, I mean, dependent on 15 stores and supermarkets and the refrigeration factor.

16 But I had also another dream. And it's 17 sort of coming around to, you know, this last week of 18 level low emergency, that there is a metallic fatigue 19 that's like you know you have an automobile, and you 20 have seen three of them in ten years.

21 Because you have a job, you can shift out 22 of one automobile into another one, but there's that 23 rest factor that's going on all the time.

24 MR. CAMERON: I hate to interrupt you, but 25 could you finish up for us, please, so we can get in NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

102 1 all the speakers.

2 MS. HOWES: So my fear, my point is to get 3 behind security as the fun end that you're capable to 4 cope with that puzzle.

5 MR. CAMERON: Thank you. Thank you very 6 much, Ann Elizabeth. We're going to go to David 7 McElwee, at this point, and then we have Debra Reger, 8 Cora Brooks and Beth Adams.

9 MR. MCELWEE: My name is David McElwee and, 10 in this spirit of full disclosure tonight, I'm an 11 Engineer at Vermont Yankee, and I also live in the ten 12 mile EPZ.

13 I could talk about the safe operation of 14 the plant, as an Engineer at Vermont Yankee. But 15 today I'd like to talk as a resident of the area, not 16 as an employee of Vermont Yankee, but to talk a little 17 bit about 20 additional years of the operation of 18 Vermont Yankee.

19 Because 20 years in the future, we need to 20 do something about the environment, about greenhouse 21 gases. My wife and I have lived in West Brattleboro 22 for nearly 30 years.

23 We own and operate a small business in 24 town. I've raised two children here and feel very 25 lucky that we have been able to join the rural country NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

103 1 setting and lifestyle that's been afforded to us.

2 Prior to working at Vermont Yankee, I 3 taught school in a public school system in a local 4 high school. Part of my teaching was in the area of 5 science, where my students and I would look at the 6 environment and the effects that fossil fuels had on 7 it.

8 Greenhouse gas emissions are a real 9 problem and we need to do something about it. We need 10 to stop relying on fossil fuels for the generation of 11 electricity and turn more towards nuclear energy.

12 Nuclear energy is safe, clean and readily 13 available for use in this country, and it does not 14 contribute to the greenhouse gas emissions and helps 15 keep our green mountains green.

16 To not allow Vermont Yankee to operate an 17 additional 20 years, would be a significant impact on 18 our environment. I'm very proud to be a member of 19 this community, and also to have spent the last 25 20 years working at Vermont Yankee.

21 Vermont Yankee is a safe, well run plant 22 and is a great asset to the area. It provides good 23 paying jobs, provides an infrastructure to attract new 24 businesses to the area.

25 To help, and help eliminate tons of NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

104 1 pollutants that would otherwise be put into the air 2 that we breathe. And I look forward to another 20 3 years of operation at Vermont Yankee, and hope that 4 the NRC will approve the license renewal application.

5 Thank you.

6 MR. CAMERON: Okay, Debra Reger, I'm not 7 sure I pronounced that correctly. Is this Debra?

8 MS. REGER: Yes.

9 MR. CAMERON: Oh, good, okay. So we have 10 a duo or duet?

11 MS. REGER: Martha is part of my Affinity 12 Group and I asked her to just stand with me for 13 support, if that's okay.

14 MR. CAMERON: This is Leftover Affinity?

15 MS. REGER: Yes, we're leftovers and since 16 it's our turn to talk, I just want to have the 17 appropriate banner. Shut It Down Now, it says. I'm 18 from central Vermont, near Montpelier, and I think 19 this is so important that I drove two hours, with my 20 Affinity Group, to be here.

21 (Applause.)

22 MS. REGER: So, I did want to start with, 23 I really believe that we are trespassing with this 24 nuclear power plant on a fragile web of life on our 25 dear planet, the Mother Earth.

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

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

105 1 So I speak from my heart, with these 2 concerns. I think the uranium that's mined to operate 3 this nuclear power plant, is coming from native land, 4 from very, people that have lived for over 30, what, 5 40 years, with the tailings of the uranium mining.

6 And why doesn't the environmental scoping 7 include the people that live, you know, with these 8 tailings, with the still births and the water, from 9 the water, from the polluted water, from the polluted 10 air.

11 And now we're going full cycle with 12 storing of radioactive waste back on the Indian 13 Reservations. I don't think this is fair. I don't 14 think there's been any, you know, where does the 15 generic scoping, you know, where does that fit in.

16 (Applause.)

17 MS. REGER: You want to use coal. What is 18 this group, Vermont Energy Partnership, you know, they 19 want to use coal that's that's taken from the Mother 20 Earth. The water in the slurry. The Peabody Coal has 21 been doing this for like 20 years, using all that 22 precious water. We're running out of water.

23 You know here we have the threat of the 24 radioactive, you know polluting the Connecticut water.

25 You know they'd rather use coal but they're gonna, you NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

106 1 know transport it by coal slurry. You know, it's not 2 fair that the corporations, you know get away with 3 this.

4 I want to thank all the grandmothers, and 5 the mothers, since November, have risked arrest here 6 in Brattleboro, and have stood, you know in the lobby 7 of Entergy* [phonetic], and have stood at the gates of 8 Vermont Yankee, and where is it that we have to send 9 our grandmothers and mothers to risk arrest? What 10 does that say?

11 And maybe we don't have the auditorium 12 full today, but I know that people don't want to live 13 with this risk anymore, and it's really not fair.

14 Okay. I want to speak to alternatives. In my home 15 town of Corinth, we publish Northern Woodlands 16 magazine. Last month--I want to give these, I don't 17 have enough for all 25 employees, but I want to give 18 you all a copy to read tonight in your hotel. "Energy 19 From Wood: Turning Woodchips Into Power, Heat and 20 Ethanol." We have the answers. We have the 21 alternatives. We've listened to Amory Levans*

22 [phonetic], Rocky Mountain Institute, and other 23 experts. We can use energy efficiency.

24 Finally, Vermont just passed a bill that 25 we will be selling appliances that really turn off NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

107 1 when you turn them off. You know it seems like a 2 little thing but all this stuff will really add up.

3 We have the program in Vermont, Vermont Efficiency.

4 We can like use this and we don't need the 5 power from this nuke; we really don't. So I want to 6 give you all a copy of this to read tonight, and I 7 guess in closing, I just want to thank my affinity 8 group for coming down, especially to Martha, this is--

9 and Monica, and Sal.

10 MR. : [off-microphone comment]

11 MS. REGER: Yeah. It is really difficult 12 to--you know, workers do have a choice. We protested 13 a lot, as the New Hampshire Women's Peace Network, at 14 Sanders, in New Hampshire, in Nashua, New Hampshire.

15 They were making parts for the cruise missile.

16 And, you know you do have a choice. Every 17 worker has a choice. I don't think it's our job to 18 provide alternative jobs, but we can convert that 19 plant, we can still have a good economy, we can 20 convert that plant, run it on gas, like I said we can 21 use alternatives and provide the same amount of 22 energy.

23 I do feel that people need to look within 24 when--and all you guys that work for the Nuclear 25 Regulatory Commission, you know, I don't know how you NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

108 1 can sleep at night. I really don't.

2 So that's all I'm gonna say.

3 MR. CAMERON: All right. Thank you very 4 much. And thank you for the magazines too.

5 Cora. So we have Cora and Beth, and then 6 we're going to have Rani Franovich close the meeting 7 for us.

8 Cora.

9 MS. BROOKS: I found a country journal 10 from 1980, and I thought, well, I wondered why I had 11 saved it. There was a nice article about mushrooms in 12 it. And then I kept looking through it--and I just 13 found it this week, and there's an article about 14 Vermont Yankee from 1980, about the town of Vernon, 15 and how much anxiety--1980, we're talking about. How 16 much anxiety exists in the communities around this 17 plant. And not only does this plant--let's say it--

18 causes cancer, causes cancer of unborn, yet unborn 19 children. Not only does it cause cancer, it causes 20 heart attacks for the anxiety that people live with.

21 People are in denial as much as possible, 22 the way you are when somebody dies. In some 23 religions, you come back a year later to make sure no 24 one has seen that person. Because it's hard to 25 believe when somebody dies. It's hard to believe that NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

109 1 the nuclear plant that's serving your community and 2 the state of Vermont, and is giving jobs to a lot of 3 the people that you know and care about, that's hard, 4 to feel that it's a shaky situation.

5 Now Copernicus and Galileo suggested the 6 most outrageous thing. They said, you know, the sun 7 doesn't rise in the east and set in the west. The 8 world turns around. Now we also know that the world 9 wobbles. I'm not making this up.

10 The scientists. I have a New York Times 11 headline that says the world wobbles, the sun rings 12 like a bell. The scientists know that. We know that 13 there are volcanoes that erupt. We know that there is 14 lightning that strikes. We know that this year alone, 15 there have been three or four significant coal mine 16 operations that have faltered and killed people.

17 The light isn't very good for me here but 18 I am going to try and read to you from this article 19 that was written by David Riley in 1980.

20 Country Journal. A few of the Vermont 21 Yankee, up until 1980, wobbles. High-pressure turbine 22 leaks shut down 82 hours9.490741e-4 days 0.0228 hours 1.35582e-4 weeks 3.1201e-5 months . That was in 1973. 4-27-74, 23 following scheduled shutdown, plant restricted to 80 24 percent power output due to excessive radioactivity 25 levels in off-gas system.

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

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

110 1 5-24-74. Leaks in drywall exterior, 2 containment vessel shut eleven days. Again '74.

3 Multiple lightning strikes, shut down 75 hours8.680556e-4 days 0.0208 hours 1.240079e-4 weeks 2.85375e-5 months . That 4 was on 7-5-74.

5 3-23-75. Operator error, high reactor 6 water level, shut down three days.

7 6-5-75. Failure of start-up transformer, 8 power source for cooling tower fans, shut down ten 9 days.

10 1975. Vibration problems in nuclear 11 reactor, shut down 23 days. 9.1 million cost passed 12 on to consumers. This is our cheap electricity.

13 11-12-75. Vermont Yankee given seven 14 months to begin building a gamma radiation shield to 15 protect people at elementary school across the street 16 from plant.

17 1-27-76. General Electric company, 18 manufacturer of reactor, indicates that the torus 19 could lurch upward under pressure, causing major 20 damage. The torus is a donut-shaped pool inside the 21 containment vessel. Shut down 18 days.

22 5-14-76. Lightning causes fire and 23 radiation releases.

24 I don't care how good the workers are in 25 the plants. May they stay alive and not become NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

111 1 angels. I don't care how good they are. They're 2 human stuff. It doesn't matter that we're on a world 3 that wobbles, lightning and earthquakes.

4 7-18-76. Plant releases 83,000 gallons of 5 water containing low levels of radioactive tritium 6 into Connecticut River. Yankee settles with state of 7 Vermont for $30,000.

8 Now it goes on. But I want to say that I 9 had a grandmother who was related to her sister, who 10 was once married to a governor of Vermont, and I came 11 up here as a child because there was no electricity 12 when we came up to the place that we came up to, and 13 I loved that, and I came back, and my grandmother, the 14 sister of one of the governor's old wives, she died in 15 childbirth, but she said when you come to a place, she 16 said, you take care of it and leave it a little better 17 than you found it.

18 When you come to visit a place, you leave 19 it a little better than you found it. And what she 20 said about her land in Vermont. She said this isn't 21 my land. This isn't our land. This is land that we 22 take care of while we have it. And we take care of it 23 and make it a little bit better than it was.

24 So I'd like to ask the NRC to take a 25 really close look, and I would like to reverse the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

112 1 understanding. You asked us to help you. I'm asking 2 you to help us.

3 MR. CAMERON: Okay. Thank you, Cora. We 4 actually have two speakers and then I'm going to go to 5 Rani. And we have Beth Adams from Citizens Awareness 6 Network and then Jane Newton will be our final 7 speaker.

8 I think this is Beth coming down now, all 9 right, and then we'll go to Jane.

10 MS. ADAMS: Hi, there, how are you? I'm 11 a new resident of Greenfield, which is ten miles away 12 from Vermont Yankee. I came down in February, not 13 really knowing about Vermont Yankee. So I must say 14 that I'm not up to speed on all the details, and I 15 appreciate all the research that people that have 16 spoken before me have shared.

17 I've been an anti-nuclear activist, 18 however, since 1979, and at that time I opposed 19 nuclear power plants and I still any nuclear power 20 plant, and I do not believe that Vermont Yankee should 21 be open one more day.

22 We need to close Vermont Yankee, not just 23 think about extending licensing for 20 years. How 24 foolish is it to develop an energy that we don't know 25 what the waste, what we're going to do with the waste, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

113 1 we're just going to let it sit there, and, in fact, 2 others that have spoken before me have shared that 3 this waste puts us in greater danger. Not only does 4 it put us in greater danger. Not one of you yet has 5 spoken about the people that have died already in 6 Kosovo, in Vieques, in Iraq, in Afghanistan, having 7 been poisoned by depleted uranium on the tips of the 8 missiles that were dropped there, either by protests, 9 as in Vieques, or so that we could, so that 10 corporations could control their profits.

11 It is time, as others have shared before 12 me, that we take a hard look at what we are doing.

13 Taking a different course now, I'd like to go in a 14 direction of what we can do, and others have shared 15 about this already as well.

16 We can, as Citizens Awareness Network well 17 knows, we can develop the technology at a reasonable 18 price, relatively much more reasonable price than 19 creating nuclear, keeping this plant alive, create 20 wind power, geothermal, which hasn't been mentioned.

21 Geothermal energy and hydro energy to create 22 sustainable energy resources.

23 I came from Maine. We closed Vermont 24 Yankee. They have a viable renewal energy plan in 25 Maine. They have a dam that actually has little NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

114 1 elevators that lift the fish uphill and people can buy 2 into energy produced by that type of energy.

3 Geothermal. There's a lot of hope in what that can 4 do.

5 We have a heated core from the center of 6 the Earth, that we're not utilizing, we're not 7 resourcing ourselves with that yet, except in areas 8 of--when I say "we" I'm thinking of this area. But 9 other areas of the world and other parts of the 10 country rely on geothermal energy for electricity and 11 fuel already.

12 So there are things that we can do and 13 that's what I think we should be focusing on, and it 14 should be a regional discussion since it affects 15 regional issues. Thank you.

16 MR. CAMERON: Okay. Thank you, Beth. Our 17 final speaker is Jane Newton.

18 MS. NEWTON: I really didn't plan to speak 19 at all but I sort a can't help it. I have no real 20 qualifications, except that I'm a really terrified 21 mother and grandmother, and I can tell, I can 22 recognize a corporate con, corporate lies, and what I 23 believe is a corporate crime against humanity, and for 24 the people who are trying to tell us that nuclear 25 energy is clean and it doesn't contribute to NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

115 1 greenhouse gases, are not taking into consideration 2 the amount of nonrenewable energy used to dig up and 3 process the uranium, to make it into a fissionable 4 form.

5 And as the person before me mentioned, the 6 side product of making uranium fissionable is what's 7 known as depleted uranium which is not depleted at 8 all, and it's providing free, it has been providing 9 free, since about 1990, the means for the U.S.

10 military to fight a secret ongoing nuclear war.

11 Therefore, nuclear energy is fueling war, which is 12 just one more way to destroy the world.

13 MR. CAMERON: Okay. Thank you, Jane, and 14 thank all of you for your comments today, and I'm just 15 going to have Rani Franovich close the meeting for us.

16 Rani.

17 MS. FRANOVICH: Thank you, Chip. I just 18 wanted to thank you all for coming again. I know a 19 lot of you don't necessarily feel that the NRC takes 20 your comments into consideration. I can assure you we 21 do. Not all of you may be happy with how we change or 22 incorporate the comments, depending on how they fit 23 into the process, but I can assure you that we will 24 respond to the comments that we receive at this 25 meeting and in writing.

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

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

116 1 So thanks again for coming. Those of you 2 who registered and met our attendants at the front 3 table out here, they have meeting feedback forms, that 4 we're hoping you will out, if you have any suggestions 5 for how we can improve the conduct of our public 6 meetings, things we can do better, how we may serve 7 you better. Please let us know. The forms are 8 addressed, pre-paid. All you have to do is fill them 9 out and mail them in, or you can deliver them to a 10 member of the staff.

11 And I just want to remind everyone that we 12 will be receiving comments, in writing, until June 13 23rd, as Rich Emch mentioned, and he is the point of 14 contact for receiving those comments.

15 Any comments received after that time, we 16 will do our best to consider, and again, thanks for 17 attending our meeting.

18 One other thing. The NRC staff will be 19 around here for a few minutes, if there are any 20 questions that people have, that we weren't able to 21 discuss with you during the meeting. Thank you.

22 (Off the record.)

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

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

v t e Letter Sequence Request
TAC:MC9670, (Approved, Closed)
Initiation Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, ... further results\|Request]] Acceptance, Acceptance, Acceptance Administration Meeting, Meeting, Meeting, Meeting Questions 1 June 2006 27 April 2006 Answers 1 August 2006 19 September 2006 Results Approval, Approval Other: BVY 06-065, 2006/07/27-Vermont Yankee License Renewal Application, Amendment 6, BVY 06-077, 2006/08/10-Vermont Yankee - License Renewal Application, Amendment 9, BVY 06-095, E-mail: (PA-LR) Copy of SAMA Response, ML061040142, ML061740035, ML061740572, ML061770071, ML061920474, ML062680034, ML063120067, ML063420178, ML070230041, ML070710215, ML071430101, ML071840778, ML071840890
MONTHYEAR2006-05-23 [Table View]

ML061840033: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 18:56, 7 December 2019

Text

Title:

Navigation menu

ML061840033: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 18:56, 7 December 2019

Text

Title:

Navigation menu

Search