ML072260053
| ML072260053 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | FitzPatrick  |
| Issue date: | 08/01/2007 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| jmm7 | |
| References | |
| NRC-1696 | |
| Download: ML072260053 (20) | |
Text
Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIONTitle:Draft EIS: James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant: Evening SessionDocket Number:50-333 Location:Oswego, New York Date:Wednesday, August 1, 2007Work Order No.:NRC-1696Pages 1-18 NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC.
Court Reporters and Transcribers 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 234-4433 1 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701(202) 234-4433 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 1+ + + + +2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3+ + + + +4 OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION (NRR) 5+ + + + +6 PUBLIC MEETING 7 TO DISCUSS THE 8 DRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 9 FOR THE LICENSE RENEWAL OF 10 JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT 11+ + + + +12 7:00 P.M. SESSION 13 WEDNESDAY, 14 AUGUST 1, 2007 15+ + + + +16 SCRIBA TOWN HALL 17 42 CREAMERY ROAD 18 OSWEGO, NEW YORK 13126 19+ + + + +20 21 NRC STAFF PRESENT
- 22 RANI L. FRANOVICH, NRR/ADRO/DLR/REB 23 JESSIE M. MUIR, NRR/ADRO/DLR/REB 24 25 2 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701(202) 234-4433 P R O C E E D I N G S 1MS. FRANOVICH: Good evening. We're about 2 to start. I just wanted to take a few minutes to 3 welcome you all and thank you for coming.
4This meeting is a meeting to solicit some 5comments from the public on the Draft Environmental 6Impact Statement for FitzPatrick. This is a 7Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement to our 8 Generic Environmental Impact Statement.
9We'll have a brief presentation that 10Jessie Muir will provide on preliminary findings of 11the staff's environmental review for FitzPatrick 12 license renewal.
13Jessie Muir is the project manager for the 14 environmental review.
15Then we'll have a brief question-and-16answer session, if there are any questions from the 17public on anything that Jessie discusses in her 18presentation, and then we'll open up the floor to 19receive comments from the public. The comments will 20be transcribed. We have Peter here, our 21transcriptionist, who will take down all of the 22comments, and we ask that you use the microphone to 23provide your comments, state your name and 24affiliation, if there is any, and we ask that just one 25 3 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701(202) 234-4433person at a time speak so we can get a clean 1transcript of this meeting, and if you could all just 2check and make sure that your cell phones are turned 3off at this time, so we don't have any distractions or 4 interruptions.
5 And with that, Jessie.
6MS. MUIR: Good evening. Thank you all 7for taking the time to come to this meeting this 8evening. I hope the information we provide you will 9help you to understand the process we're going 10through, what we've done so far, and the role you can 11play in helping us make sure that the final EIS is 12 accurate.13I'd like to start off briefly by going 14over the agenda and the purpose of tonight's meeting.
15We're going to present preliminary 16findings of our environmental review, which assesses 17the impacts associated with renewing the operating 18 license for FitzPatrick.
19Then we'll give you some information about 20the schedule for the remainder of our review, and how 21 you can submit comments in the future.
22And then finally, really, the most 23important part of tonight's meeting, is where we 24 receive any comments that you may have. Next slide.
25 4 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701(202) 234-4433The Atomic Energy Act gives the NRC the 1authority to issue operating licenses to commercial 2 nuclear power plants for a period of up to 40 years.
3For FitzPatrick, that license will expire 4 in 2014. Our regulations make provisions for 5extending plant operation for an additional 20 years.
6FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, owned and operated by 7 Entergy, has requested license renewal.
8As part of the NRC's review of that 9license renewal application, we perform an 10environmental review to look at the impacts of an 11 additional 20 years of operation.
12We held a meeting here, in October of 132006, to seek input regarding the issues we needed to 14evaluate. Now we are here to present the preliminary 15results in the Draft Supplemental EIS, and afterwards, 16we'll open the floor for comments on the draft 17 document.
18All right. This slide illustrates the 19environmental review process. This review, which is 20the subject of today's meeting, evaluates the impacts 21of license renewal. It involves scoping activities 22and the development of a document called the 23Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, or an 24 EIS.25 5 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701(202) 234-4433The Draft EIS provides the staff's 1 preliminary assessment of environmental impacts during 2the period of extended operation. The Draft EIS for 3FitzPatrick was published for comment in June. Next 4 slide.5 Next, I would like to give a little 6information on the statute that governs the 7environmental review, and that statute is NEPA, or the 8 National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
9NEPA requires that all federal agencies 10follow a systematic approach in evaluating potential 11 environmental impacts associated with certain actions.
12We, at the NRC, are required to consider 13the impacts of the proposed action, in this case 14license renewal, and also any mitigation for those 15 impacts.16 We are also required to consider 17 alternatives to the proposed action.
18The NRC has determined that an EIS will be 19prepared for any proposed license renewal of a nuclear 20power plant. NEPA and our EIS are disclosure tools.
21They're specifically structured to involve public 22participation and obtain public comment. This meeting 23facilitates the public participation in our 24 environmental review.
25 6 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701(202) 234-4433In the 1990's, the NRC staff developed a 1Generic EIS that addresses a number of issues common 2to all nuclear plants. As a result of that analysis, 3the NRC was able to determine that a number of 4environmental issues were common to or similar for all 5 nuclear power plants.
6The staff is supplementing that Generic 7EIS with a site-specific EIS that addresses issues 8 specific to the FitzPatrick facility.
9So together, the Generic EIS and the 10supplemental EIS form the staff's analysis of the 11environmental impacts of license renewal for the 12 FitzPatrick site.
13 Also during the review, the NRC staff 14looks for and evaluates any new and significant 15information that might call into question the 16conclusions that were previously reached in the 17Generic EIS. In addition, the staff searches for new 18 issues not already addressed in the Generic EIS.
19This slide is our decision standard for 20the environmental review, and simply put, is license 21renewal acceptable from an environmental standpoint?
22 Next slide.
23We use information we received in the 24environmental report submitted as part of Entergy's 25 7 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701(202) 234-4433license renewal application. We conducted an audit in 1December of last year, where we toured the facility, 2observed plant systems, and evaluated the interaction 3 of the plant operation with the environment.
4We talked to plant personnel and reviewed 5specific documentation. We also spoke to federal, 6 state, and local officials, permitting authorities and 7social services. We also consider the comments 8 received during the public scoping period.
9All of this information forms the basis of 10our preliminary conclusions presented in the Draft 11 Supplemental EIS. Next slide.
12And this slide just shows some of the 13 various disciplines that are included in our team.
14In the mid 1990's, the NRC evaluated the 15impacts of all operating nuclear power plants across 16the U.S. NRC looked at 92 separate impact areas, and 17found that for 69 of these areas, the impacts were the 18same for all plants with similar features.
19The NRC called these Category 1 issues and 20they were able to make generic conclusions, that all 21the impacts on the environment would be small. The NRC 22 published these conclusions in the Generic EIS in 23 1996.24The NRC was unable to make similar 25 8 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701(202) 234-4433determinations for the remaining 23 issues, and as a 1consequence, NRC decided that we would prepare a 2supplemental EIS for each plant, to address the 3remaining 23 issues, and this slide lists some of the 4major impact areas addressed for FitzPatrick. Next 5 slide.6 This slide outlines how impacts are 7quantified. The Generic EIS defined three impact 8levels--small, moderate and large. I'm going to use 9the fishery in Lake Ontario to illustrate how we use 10 these three terms.
11The operation of the FitzPatrick plant may 12cause a loss of fish at the intake structure. If the 13loss of fish is so small, that it cannot be detected 14in relation to the total population in Lake Ontario, 15 the impact would be small.
16If losses cause the population to decline, 17and then stabilize at a lower level, the impact would 18 be moderate.
19If losses at the intake cause the fish 20population to decline to the point where it cannot be 21stabilized, and continually declines, then the impact 22 would be large.
23Now the first set of issues I'm going to 24talk about relate to the cooling system for 25 9 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701(202) 234-4433FitzPatrick. There are three Category 2 issues 1relevant to the cooling system. These are 2 entrainment, impingement and heat shock.
3Entrainment refers to the process where 4very small aquatic organisms are pulled into the 5cooling system. The majority of these organisms 6experience mortality due to physical, chemical, or 7 thermal impacts.
8Impingement refers to larger organisms 9being pulled into the cooling system and getting 10pinned on the debris screen. Impinged organisms 11generally experience a lower mortality rate than 12 entrainment.
13Heat shock, the third Category 2 issue 14related to the cooling system, refers to when 15relatively warm water is released into a colder 16environment. Aquatic organisms adapted to the cooler 17water can lose equilibrium, or die, when exposed to 18warmer water. The team evaluated these three impact 19areas and our preliminary conclusion is that the 20FitzPatrick cooling system could have a small impact 21 on the fishery in Lake Ontario.
22Radiological impacts are a Category 1 23issue. This means the NRC has made a generic 24 determination that the impact of radiological releases 25 10 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701(202) 234-4433from normal nuclear plant operations during the period 1 of extended operation is small.
2By design, the operation of nuclear power 3plants is expected to result in small releases of 4radiological effluents. FitzPatrick is no exception.
5During our site audit, we looked at 6selected parts of the radioactive effluent release and 7radiological environmental monitoring programs, and 8 supporting documentation.
9We looked at how the gaseous and liquid 10effluents are controlled, treated, monitored and 11released, as well as how solid radioactive wastes are 12handled, packaged and shipped. We looked at how the 13applicant's radiation protection program maintains 14radiological releases in compliance with the 15 regulations for radioactive effluents.
16We also looked at the applicant's data 17from on-site and near-site environmental radiological 18monitoring station locations for airborne releases and 19direct radiation, as well as monitoring stations 20beyond the plant site where water, milk, fish, and 21 food products are sampled.
22Based on our review of the data, we found 23that the calculated dose to the maximally-exposed 24member of the public to be well within the NRC's 25 11 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701(202) 234-4433 radiation protection limit.
1The dose of the maximally-exposed member 2is a conservative calculation which assumes maximum 3values associated with an individual who is exposed 4 from radiation sources from the plant.
5Since releases from the plant are not 6expected to increase on a year to year basis during 7the period of extended operation, and since we also 8 found no new and significant information related to 9this issue, we preliminarily adopted the generic 10conclusion that the radiological impact on human 11 health and the environment is small.
12There are no aquatic species, federally 13listed as threatened and/or endangered, that have the 14potential to occur in the vicinity of FitzPatrick or 15its transmission lines; however, there are five 16terrestrial species. We prepared a detailed 17biological assessment to analyze the effects of 18 continued operation of FitzPatrick on these listed 19 terrestrial species.
20The staff's preliminary determination is 21 that the impacts during the period of extended 22operation, on threatened or endangered species, would 23 be small.24There are two classes of accidents 25 12 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701(202) 234-4433evaluated in the Generic EIS, design-basis accidents 1and severe accidents. Design-basis accidents are 2those accidents that the plant is designed to 3withstand without risk to the public. The ability of 4the plant to withstand these accidents has to be 5 demonstrated before the plant is granted a license.
6Because the licensee has to demonstrate 7acceptable plant performance for the design-basis 8 accidents through the life of the plant, the 9Commission found in the Generic EIS, that the 10environmental impacts of design-basis accidents is 11 small for all plants.
12The second category of accidents is severe 13accidents. Severe accidents are, by definition, more 14severe than design-basis accidents because they would 15 result in substantial damage to the reactor core.
16The Commission found, in the Generic EIS, 17that the risk of a severe accident is small for all 18plants. Nevertheless, the Commission determined that 19 alternatives to mitigate severe accidents must be 20considered for all plants that have not done so.
21These are called SAMAs, Severe Accident Mitigation 22 Alternatives.
23The SAMA evaluation is a Category 2 issue 24 and thus requires a site-specific analysis.
25 13 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701(202) 234-4433The purpose of the SAMA evaluation is to 1ensure that plant changes with the potential for 2changing severe accident safety performance are 3 identified and evaluated.
4The scope of potential plant improvements 5 considered included hardware modifications, procedural 6changes, training program improvements, and basically 7a full spectrum of potential changes. The scope 8includes SAMAs that would prevent core damage as well 9as SAMAs that would improve containment performance, 10 if a core damage event occurs.
11 The preliminary results of the FitzPatrick 12 SAMA evaluation are summarized on this slide.
13239 potential SAMA candidate improvements 14were identified for FitzPatrick. That number was 15reduced to 63, based on a multi-step screening 16process. Then a more detailed assessment of the risk 17reduction potential, and implementation cost, were 18 performed for each of the 63 SAMAs.
19Six SAMAs were identified as potentially 20cost-beneficial. None of the potentially cost-21beneficial SAMAs, however, are related to the managing 22of effects of plant aging during the period of 23 extended operation. Accordingly, they are not required 24 to be implemented as part of license renewal.
25 14 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701(202) 234-4433Regardless, Entergy is encouraged to consider, and 1evaluate further, the potentially cost-beneficial 2SAMAs. In fact, Entergy has indicated that one SAMA 3has already been implemented, one is scheduled for the 4end of this year, and the other four have been 5combined into a single project undergoing an in-house 6 review. 7Cumulative impacts are the impacts of the 8proposed action, in this case license renewal, taken 9together with other past, present, or reasonably 10foreseeable future actions, regardless of what agency 11 or person undertakes those actions.
12The cumulative impacts were evaluated for 13the period of extended operation. Our preliminary 14determination is that any cumulative impacts resulting 15from continued operation of FitzPatrick would be small 16 for all resources.
17And as part of the environmental review 18process, we also evaluated a number of alternatives to 19license renewal. Specifically, we looked at the 20impacts of replacing FitzPatrick power, approximately 21 880 megawatts, with power from other sources.
22Alternatives that the team looked at 23included a "no-action" alternative, that is, not 24renewing the license. We also looked at replacing 25 15 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701(202) 234-4433FitzPatrick generation with generation from new power 1plants, either coal, natural gas, or new nuclear. We 2considered the impacts and capabilities of providing 3 replacement power with purchased power.
4We also looked at other technologies such 5as wood, wind, and solar power. Then we looked at a 6combination of alternatives, including conservation, 7 to replace that capacity.
8For each alternative, we looked at the 9same type of issues that we did when we were 10evaluating the environmental impacts of license 11 renewal.
12The team's preliminary conclusion is that 13the environmental impacts of the selected alternatives 14would reach moderate to large significance in at least 15 some of the categories evaluated.
16During the environmental review, we found 17no information that was both new and significant.
18Therefore, we have preliminarily adopted the Generic 19EIS conclusion that impacts associated with the 69 20 issues will continue to be small.
21In the FitzPatrick supplemental EIS, we 22analyzed the remaining 23 Category 2 issues, and 23determined that the environmental impact resulting 24 from these issues was also small in all categories.
25 16 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701(202) 234-4433During our analysis, we found that the 1environmental impacts of alternatives, in at least 2some impact areas, would reach moderate to large 3levels of significance. Based on these conclusions, 4the NRC staff's preliminary recommendation is that the 5environmental impacts of license renewal are not so 6 great, that license renewal would be unreasonable.
7Listed are important milestone dates for 8 the FitzPatrick environmental review. In June, the 9FitzPatrick Draft Supplemental EIS was published. We 10are currently accepting public comments on the draft 11until September 5th, and the Final EIS is scheduled to 12 be published in January of next year.
13This slide identifies me as your primary 14point of contact with the NRC for the environmental 15review. Mr. Tommy Lee is the contact for any 16 questions related to the safety review.
17Documents related to the FitzPatrick 18 review may be found in the Penfield Library on the 19SUNY Oswego campus, or the Oswego public library. At 20the bottom of the slide is an Internet address where 21you can directly access the FitzPatrick Supplemental 22 EIS. 23And there are several ways you can provide 24your comments on the FitzPatrick draft. You can 25 17 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701(202) 234-4433provide comments today during the comment period. If 1perhaps you're not ready to provide comments today, 2you can send your comments via e-mail to 3FitzPatrickEIS@nrc.gov. You can also send them via 4"snail mail" or hand-deliver them to us at the 5 headquarters.
6And with that, I'm done. I'll hand it 7 over to Rani.
8MS. FRANOVICH: Okay. Thank you, Jessie.
9Before we go into comments, let me just 10ask if anybody has any questions on Jessie's 11 presentation.
12[No response]
13 MS. FRANOVICH: No questions?
14Okay. We have one person who registered 15to comment. Mr. Ken Schwartz. Is Mr. Schwartz here?
16[No response]
17MS. FRANOVICH: Okay. Is there anyone who 18did not register to comment, who would like to comment 19 at this time?
20[No response]
21 MS. FRANOVICH:
22Okay. Then that concludes our meeting. Let me 23just thank everyone for coming. We appreciate your 24attendance at our meeting, and if you have any 25 18 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701(202) 234-4433questions at the end of the meeting, the staff will be 1here for a few minutes. You're welcome to come up and 2 ask us any questions you may have.
3And I wanted to remind everyone that we 4are accepting comments until September 5th on the 5Draft Environmental Impact Statement for FitzPatrick.
6And also, if you have any suggestions for 7how we can do our meetings in the future, areas we can 8improve on, things we might want to do different, we 9have a meeting feedback form in the back of the room.
10You're welcome to fill one of those out, hand it to a 11member of the staff, or you can just fold it up and 12 mail it to us. The postage is prepaid.
13 And thanks again for coming.
14[Whereupon, at 7:18 p.m., the public 15 meeting was concluded.]
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 19 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701(202) 234-4433 1