ML14097A253

Transcript of 03/25/2014 for Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Draft Environmental Impact Statement Public Meeting: Evening Session - Corrected. Pages 1-84

ML14097A253
Person / Time
Site:	Davis Besse
Issue date:	03/25/2014
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
References
NRC-650
Download: ML14097A253 (84)

Text

Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Davis-Besse Nuclear Power StationDraft Environmental Impact Statement Public Meeting:

Evening SessionTitle:Docket Number:Location:

Date:(50-346)Port Clinton, OhioTuesday, March 25, 2014Work Order No.:NRC-650Pages 1-84NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC.Court Reporters and Transcribers 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W.Washington, D.C. 20005(202) 234-4433 12345678910111213141516171819202122232425UNITED STATES OF AMERICANUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

+ + + + +DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATIONPUBLIC MEETINGDRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

+ + + + +Tuesday,March 25th, 2014+ + + + +Port Clinton, OhioThe Public Meeting was held at 7:00 p.m. at theCamp Perry Conference Center, 1000 Lawrence Road,Building 600, Port Clinton, Ohio, Alison Rivera,Facilitator, presiding.

NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 2123456789101112131415161718192021222324APPEARANCES:

ALISON RIVERA -FACILITATOR JOHN LUBINSKIBRIAN WITTACKBOB HOFFMANELAINE KEEGANJAMNES CAMERONDAVID HILLSVIKTORIA MITLYNGHARRAL LOGARASNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 312345678910111213141516171819202122232425A-G-E-N-D-A WELCOME AND OPENING REMARKSOVERVIEW OF DRAFT SEISELAINE KEEGANQUESTIONS PUBLIC COMMENTSCLOSING REMARKSNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 47212282(202) 234-4433 4I P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 2 7:03 p.m.3 FACILITATOR RIVERA: Good evening again4 and welcome to this evening's meeting on the Draft5 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the6 Davis-Besse application to renew its operating license7 for an additional 20 years.8 The main purpose, of this meeting, is to9 receive public comments on this NRC staff independent 10 review of its review.11 My name is Alison Rivera and I'm going to12 be your facilitator for this meeting.

My role, as the13 facilitator, is to ensure that this meeting will run14 smoothly, ensure that everyone, who would wish to have15 an opportunity to speak, has a chance to do so and to16 try to keep us on time.17 This is a category three public meeting to18 encourage active participation and information 19 exchange, with the public, to obtain comments on the20 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement.

21 Hopefully everyone had an opportunity to22 sign in, at the registration desk at the lobby, but if23 you haven't the sheets will be available after the24 meeting.25 The agenda for this meeting includes aNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 5I presentation, by NRC staff to review the license2 renewal process, and present the preliminary 3 conclusions from the DSEIS, or Draft Supplemental 4 Environmental Impact Statement.

5 When the presentation concludes we will6 have a very brief question and answer on the materials 7 presented during the presentation.

8 After that we will move to the public9 comments.

The rest rooms are out in the lobby, and to10 the left. Emergency exits are well marked throughout 11 this room and to each side.12 And if we do, in the unlikely event, need13 to evacuate, please follow the instructions of the14 security officers.

15 There are a few ground rules for this16 meeting.

First, and most important, please be17 respectful of the other participants in this meeting.18 We want everyone, who wishes to speak, to19 have an opportunity to do so. Also, please turn off20 all electronic

devices, or turn them to vibrate.21 We do understand, if you need to take a22 phone call. However, if you need to take one please23 move outside to the lobby, so that we get a clear24 recording of this meeting.25 As I just mentioned we are recording thisNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 61 meeting so we ask that you keep side bar conversations, 2 and background noise, to a minimum.3 Also, as such, we will need anyone who is4 making a comment to be at a microphone, either up here5 at the podium, or there is a center aisle mic.6 Finally, the NRC is always looking to7 improve our meetings and your feedback is important to8 us. We have some postage paid, public meeting feedback9 forms on the registration table that you can fill out10 tonight and give to any NRC staff members, or you may11 mail them back.12 To get started, there are some NRC staff,13 here at the meeting, tonight.

And I would like to take14 a moment to introduce them.15 From headquarters we have John Lubinski, 16 the director of the division of license renewal in the17 office of nuclear reactor regulation.

18 We have Brian Wittack, the chief of the19 environmental projects management branch; Bob Hoffman20 is out at the registration table. He is an environmental 21 scientist in the environmental review and guidance22 update branch.23 Elaine Keegan will be delivering the24 presentation.

She is the senior project manager of the25 Davis-Besse Environmental Project.NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 71 From our Region III office we have Jamnes2 Cameron, the reactor projects branch chief; David3 Hills, the engineering branch chief; Viktoria Mitlyng,4 the senior public affairs officer, towards the middle5 of the room.6 Harral Logaras, standing near the doors,7 is our senior regional governmental liaison8 specialist.

We also have Elizabeth Pool, from the U.S.9 EPA Chicago office, here at this meeting, and all of10 us will be available for, approximately, 30 minutes at11 the close of the meeting, if you have questions that12 you would like to address, that are not on the Draft13 Environmental Impact Statement.

14 With that I would like to turn the meeting15 over to Elaine Keegan, project manager in the division16 of license renewal.

Please hold questions.

17 MS. KEEGAN: Thank you, Alison. Good18 evening, thank you all for turning out tonight.

My19 name is Elaine Keegan, I'm the environmental project20 manager for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station21 license renewal review.22 I hope the information we provide, with23 this presentation, will help you understand what we24 have done so far, and the role you can play in helping25 us make sure that the Final Environmental ImpactNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 81 Statement is accurate and correct.2 I would like to emphasize that the3 Environmental Review is not yet complete.

4 I'd like to start off by, briefly, going5 over the agenda for today's presentation.

I will6 discuss the NRC's regulatory role, the preliminary 7 findings of our Environmental Review, which addresses 8 the impacts associated with extending the operating 9 license of Davis-Besse for an additional 20 years.10 And the current schedule for the remainder 11 of the Environmental Review and how you can submit12 comments outside of this meeting.13 At the end of this presentation there will14 be a short time for questions on the presentation, or15 what is in the presentation.

And then we will take your16 comments.

17 The NRC was established to regulate18 civilian use of nuclear materials including facilities 19 producing nuclear power.20 The NRC conducts license renewal reviews21 for plant owners who wish to operate them beyond their22 initial license period.23 The NRC license renewal review address24 safety issues related to managing the effects of aging,25 on the plant, and the environmental issues associated NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 91 with an additional 20 years of operation.

2 In all aspects, of the NRC's regulation, 3 our mission is three-fold; to ensure adequate4 protection of public health and safety, to promote5 common defense, and security and to protect the6 environment.

7 License renewal involves two parallel8 reviews, the Safety Review and the Environmental 9 Review. The Safety Review focuses on the aging of10 components, and structures, that the NRC deems11 important to plant safety.12 The staff's main objective, in the Safety13 Review, is to determine that the effects of aging will14 be adequately managed by the Applicant.

15 The results of the Safety Review are16 documented in a Safety Evaluation Report. The17 Environmental Review considers, evaluates, and18 discloses the environmental impacts of continued plant19 operation for additional 20 years.20 As part of our Environmental Review the21 staff considers the scoping comments, provided by the22 public, reviews the licensee's Environmental Report,23 conducts an Environmental Site Audit, and consults with24 other federal and state agencies.

25 The staff then prepares a Supplemental NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 10I Environmental Impact Statement, or SEIS, to document2 the Environmental Review.3 We are here, today, to discuss the4 potential site-specific impacts of license renewal for5 Davis-Besse.

6 The Generic Environmental Impact7 Statement, or GEIS, which was published in 1996, and8 updated in 2013, examines the possible environmental 9 impacts that could occur, as a result of renewing10 licenses, of individual nuclear power plants, under the11 regulations in 10CFR Part 54.12 The GEIS, to the extent possible, 13 establishes the bounds and significance of these14 potential impacts.

The analyses, in the GEIS,15 encompass all operating light water power reactors.

16 For each type of environmental impact the17 GEIS established generic findings covering as many18 plants as possible.

19 For some environmental issues the GEIS20 found that a generic evaluation was not sufficient, and21 that a plant-specific analysis was required.

22 The site-specific

findings, for23 Davis-Besse, are contained in the Draft SEIS, which was24 published on February 26th, 2014.25 The Draft SEIS contains analyses of allNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 111 applicable site-specific issues, as well as a review2 of issues, covered by the GEIS, to determine whether3 the GEIS conclusions remain valid for Davis-Besse.

4 In this process the NRC also reviews the5 environmental impacts of potential power generation 6 alternatives, to license renewal, to determine whether7 the impacts expected, from license renewal, are8 unreasonable.

9 For each environmental issue identified an10 impact level is assigned.

The NRC standard of11 significance, for impacts, was established using the12 White House's Council on Environmental Quality13 terminology for significant.

14 The NRC established three levels of15 significance for potential

impacts, small, moderate16 and large, as defined on the slide.17 Cumulative impacts are impacts, to the18 environment, which result from the incremental impact19 of the action, when added to other past, present, and20 reasonably foreseeable future actions, regardless of21 which agency, federal or non-federal, or person,22 undertakes an action.23 NRC's review, of cumulative impacts,24 includes the effects on the environment from other25 past, present, and reasonably foreseeable humanNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 121 actions.2 These effects not only include the3 operation of the plant, but also impacts from4 activities unrelated to the plant, such as future5 urbanization, other energy producing facilities, in6 the area, and climate change.7 Future actions are considered to be those8 that are reasonable foreseeable through the end of the9 plant operation.

10 For aquatic resources, when the cumulative 11 effects from historical conditions on Lake Erie's12 western basin, the impacts from invasive species,13 fishing, energy development, urbanization, and14 shoreline development, and climate change, are taken15 into account, the staff has determined that there would16 likely be a large cumulative impact.17 For surface water there are a number of18 active, and proposed, energy projects in the area that19 have the potential to impact large volumes of lake20 water, to be used for cooling systems at power plants.21 Sources of pollution, such as sanitary22 landfills, urbanization, forest management, livestock 23 and agricultural production, have the potential to24 impact tributaries and Lake Erie.25 Based on this information, plus potential NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 131 impacts from climate change, the cumulative impacts to2 surface water resources, from all past, present, and3 reasonably foreseeable

actions, would be small to4 moderate.

5 For terrestrial resources, taking into6 account the historical conditions at Davis-Besse site,7 protected

species, invasive

species, urbanization, 8 habitat fragmentation, and climate change, staff has9 determined that there would, likely, be a moderate10 cumulative impact.11 With respect to cumulative human health12 impacts related to microbiological organisms, the13 overall impact would be moderate.

However, the14 Davis-Besse plant has not been linked to the presence15 of growths of cyanbacteria in Lake Erie.16 In all the other areas considered the staff17 preliminarily concluded the cumulative impacts are18 small.19 This slide lists the site-specific issues20 NRC staff reviewed for the continued operation of21 Davis-Besse.

22 With the exception of historic and23 archeological resources, the direct and indirect24 impacts, for license renewal on all of these issues,25 were found to be small.NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 141 Which means that the effects are not2 detectable, or are minor, and that they will not3 destabilize, or noticeably alter any important 4 attribute of the resource.

5 For historic and archeological resources 6 the staff determined that, based on consultation with7 the Ohio State Historical Preservation

Officer, a8 review of the Davis-Besse resource management plan, and9 the potential for additional archeological resources, 10 to be located on the Davis-Besse

property, the impact11 to historical and archeological resources would be12 small to moderate.

13 There would be no adverse impact, on14 historic properties, in accordance with the National15 Historic Preservation Act.16 This slide lists the federally protected 17 species, and habitats, in the vicinity of Davis-Besse.

18 The impact levels, from the Endangered Species Act, are19 different from the small, moderate and large as seen20 on the previous slide.21 Under the Endangered Species Act the22 impact to each species has to be determined.

The23 Endangered Species Act has three determinations, no24 effect, which means that there will be no impacts,25 positive or negative, to listed or proposed resources.

NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 151 May affect but not likely to adversely 2 affect, means that all effects are beneficial, 3 insignificant, or discountable.

4 May affect, and is likely to adversely 5 affect, means that listed resources are likely to be6 exposed to the action or its environmental consequences 7 and will respond in a negative manner to this exposure.

8 This determination would result in a9 formal consultation with the U.S Fish and Wildlife10 Service, and they would prepare a biological opinion.II Staff consulted with the U.S. Fish and12 Wildlife, and the National Marine Fishery Service, to13 identify any federally listed endangered species or14 habitats.

15 No species under the jurisdiction of the16 National Marine Fishery Service are present on the17 Davis-Besse site,.or within Lake Erie.18 The Fish and Wildlife Service identified 19 four federally listed species that occur in Ottawa20 County. Only the Indiana bat was determined to have21 an impact rating of may affect, but is unlikely to22 adversely affect.23 The National Environmental Policy Act, or24 NEPA, mandates that each Environmental Impact25 Statement consider alternatives to any proposed majorNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 16I federal action.2 A major step, in determining whether3 license renewal is reasonable or not, is comparing the4 likely impacts of continued operation of the nuclear5 power plant, with the likely impacts of alternative 6 means of power generation.

7 Alternatives must provide an option that8 allows for power generation capability beyond the term9 of the current nuclear power plant operating license10 to meet future generating needs.11 In the Draft SEIS, NRC staff initially 12 considered 17 alternatives.

After this initial13 evaluation the staff then chose the most likely three,14 and analyzed these in depth.15 Some of the alternatives considered, but16 rejected, because they could not produce sufficient 17 actual electricity production include wind power,18 solar power, wood waste, conventional hydroelectric 19 power, and oil fired power.20 The preliminary conclusion, based on the21 review of likely environmental impacts of license22 renewal, as well as potential environmental impacts of23 alternatives, to license renewal the NRC staff's24 preliminary recommendation, in the Draft SEIS is that25 the adverse environmental

impacts, of license renewalNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 17I for Davis-Besse, are not great enough to deny the option2 of license renewal for energy planning decisionmakers.

3 For the term beyond the 20 year period, of4 extended operation, the NRC addresses the management 5 of spent nuclear fuel, in the Waste Confidence 6 Decision, and previous license renewal, or SEISs, noted7 that the environmental impacts of temporary storage,8 of nuclear fuel, for the period following the reactor9 operating license term were addressed by this rule.10 This Draft SEIS does not discuss potential 11 environmental impacts of storing spent fuel for an12 extended period, after the plant shuts down.13 That issue will be addressed by the NRC's14 Waste Confidence Environmental Impact Statement and15 Rule. The Draft Rule and EIS was published on16 September 13th, 2013.17 The public comment period was from18 September 13th, 2013, through December 20th, 2013. The19 NRC staff is now reviewing, and working to resolve, the20 public comments received.

21 The Final Rule and EIS are expected to be22 published in late 2014. Additional information on the23 Waste Confidence Rulemaking, and EIS, can be found on24 the NRC's public website, at the link listed on the25 slide.NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 181 On August 2012 the Commission decided that2 the Agency will not issue license dependent upon the3 Waste Confidence

Decision, until the Waste Confidence 4 Rule is completed.

5 However, the Commission directed staff to6 proceed with license reviews.

If the results of the7 Waste Confidence EIS and rule identify information that8 impacts the analysis, in the SEIS for Davis-Besse, in9 any way the NRC staff will perform the appropriate 10 review for these issues, and may supplement the SEIS11 before the NRC makes a final decision as to whether or12 not to renew Davis-Besse's license.13 I would like to re-emphasize that the14 Environmental Review is not yet complete.

Your comments15 today, and all written comments received by the end of16 the comment period, on April 21st, will be reviewed by17 the NRC staff as we develop the Final SEIS.18 We currently plan to issue the final19 document in September of 2014. Those comments that are20 within the scope of the Environmental Review, and21 provide new and significant information, can help to22 change the staff's findings.

23 The Final SEIS will contain the staff's24 final recommendation on the acceptability of license25 renewal, based on the work we have already performed, NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 191 and any new and significant information we receive in2 the form of comments, during the comment period.3 I am the primary contact for the4 Environmental Review. Juan Uribe is the primary5 contact for the Safety Review.6 There are a limited number of copies, of7 the Draft SEIS, available on CD at the table in the8 hallway.

There is, also, paper copies at the Ida Rupp9 Public Library, in Port Clinton, and the Toledo-Lucas 10 County Public Library in Toledo.11 You can also find electronic copies of the12 Draft SEIS, along with other information about the13 Davis-Besse license renewal review on-line.14 Please be aware that any comment you15 provide, to the NRC, will be considered public records,16 and entered into the agency-wide documents access and17 management system, or ADAMS.18 Therefore do not include any information, 19 such as address, telephone

numbers, emails, that you20 do not wish to be made public.21 The NRC will address written comments in22 the same way we address spoken comments received today.23 You can submit written comments either on-line, or via24 conventional mail.25 To submit written comments, on-line, visitNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 201 the website regulations.gov, and search for docket ID2 NRC-2010-0298.

3 If you have written comments today, you may4 give them to me, or any other member of the NRC staff.5 And that concludes my presentation.

6 FACILITATOR RIVERA: Thank you, Elaine.7 And, thank you all for your attention.

8 Before we do move into the public comment9 period, the NRC staff would like to provide an10 opportunity to answer questions, or provide11 clarifications on the presentation you have just heard.12 I do have the speaker cards here so if you13 are wishing to make a comment, we will get to that in14 the next portion of the meeting.15 If you raise your hand, we will acknowledge 16 you, and you can proceed to a mic, and we ask that you17 begin by introducing yourself.

Yes, sir?18 MR. DEMARE: Ms. Keegan stressed that this19 is not the final version of the SEIS, and that she --20 FACILITATOR RIVERA: I'm sorry, could I21 just interrupt you for one moment and ask you to22 introduce yourself?

23 MR. DEMARE: My name is Joseph DeMare. Ms.24 Keegan stressed this is not the final version of the25 SEIS and that changes are still possible between nowNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 211 and the final publication.

2 My question is, can we bring up new issues3 between now and then? I had the understanding that we4 were limited in scope in what we could bring up in our5 comments, only to things that had already been brought6 up in the initial process.7 MS. KEEGAN: Part of the purpose of this8 meeting is for us to hear any new and significant 9 information that is out there.10 As members of the local public you guys11 know better what is happening out there. So if you do12 have information that you believe is important then by13 all means please give it to us. We will evaluate it.14 MR. DEMARE: Thank you.15 FACILITATOR RIVERA: Any other questions 16 on the presentation?

17 (No response.)

18 FACILITATOR RIVERA: Okay. Seeing none19 we can go ahead and move into the public comment period.20 This is the part of the meeting where we wish to hear21 from you, the public, and give you an opportunity to22 provide your comments on the Draft Supplemental 23 Environmental Impact Statement.

24 Again, as a reminder, there are a number25 of things we can do to ensure that this part of theNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 2212345678910111213141516171819202122232425meeting runs smoothly.

First, as I mentioned, I do have the cards,and we are asking everyone, who wishes to speak, to fillout a card and turn it in, so that we can have an accuratespelling of your name, for the record.Also, please keep your conversations toavoid background noise. And the comments can only beheard if you come to a microphone.

So please do notmake comments from the audience, because they will notbe recorded.

For those making comments I will announceyou to either the podium, or the microphone, and I willtry and give the next couple of speakers, so that youknow when your turn is coming up.If you would like to provide anorganization affiliation you may do so, as you approachthe mic. And I do apologize, in advance, if Imispronounce your name.But please, also introduce yourself whenyou reach the microphone.

I do have a number ofspeakers that are pre-registered.

So we do ask thatyou keep your comments to three to five minutes.If you start to exceed that I may startinching in on your personal space, or do something else.However we do ask, again, we would likeNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 231 to hear from everyone that wishes to speak. With that,2 our first three speakers are Mike Jay, Guy Parmigian, 3 and Jamie Grant.4 MR. JAY: Good evening.

My name is Mike5 Jay. And, on behalf of the Toledo Regional Growth6 Partnership and Jobs Ohio Northwest, I thank you for7 the opportunity to comment on the license renewal of8 Davis-Besse, this evening.9 The mission of the Toledo Regional Growth10 Partnership is to be the primary private sector11 contributor to a collaborative regional economic12 development enterprise that drives growth in jobs,13 capital investment, and wealth in northwest Ohio and14 southeast Michigan.

15 While there are a host of economic and16 growth factors influenced by the operations of the17 Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station they are of keen18 interest to our organization.

19 Today I would like to focus my comments on20 the jobs aspect. Without license renewal northwest 21 Ohio would suffer economically, with the loss of more22 than 700 stable, well-paying jobs.23 That number includes only the direct24 full-time jobs at Davis-Besse.

Also lost would be25 hundreds of jobs involving maintenance work completed NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 241 during outages, a large number of which are provided2 through the union halls of northwest Ohio.3 The trickle down effect would mean that4 businesses, all across the region, would suffer as5 well. Studies have indicated that employees, of6 Davis-Besse, spend tens of millions of dollars with7 area businesses each year, expenditures that would8 certainly be drastically cut in the event of a plant9 closure.10 In addition many suppliers and vendor11 companies, in the area, which support the plant with12 goods and services would feel a significant loss as13 well.14 These potential losses are not just15 hypothetical.

Hard data, on the economic impact, from16 nuclear plant closures, can be found across the17 country.18 A recent example was cited in a Boston19 Globe newspaper article from September 8th, 2013. In20 an article headlined, "A Nuclear Plant Shut Maine Town21 Full of Regret."22 The paper reported that in the 17 years,23 since the Maine Yankee Nuclear Plant closed, and 60024 workers lost their jobs, property taxes have spiked by25 more than ten times for the 3, 700 residents o Wiscasset, NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 25I Maine.2 The number living in poverty has more than3 doubled as many professionals left. Town services and4 jobs have been cut, the town lacks money to repair leaky5 windows and roofs in school buildings.

6 The high school has fewer than half the7 students it had two decades ago. And costs of8 amenities, such as cable vision, sewer, water, and9 trash, have climbed steeply.10 Wiscasset' s town manager summed it all up,11 that the long-term impact of the plant closure, all12 these years later, were still being felt with the loss13 of jobs and the downturn of the economy.14 We cannot allow the same thing to happen15 here in northwest Ohio. We urge you continue forward16 on the path to license renewal.17 Thank you for your time and consideration.

18 FACILITATOR RIVERA: Thank you. Our next19 speaker is Guy Parmigian, followed by Jamie Grant and20 Terry Lodge.21 MR. PARMIGIAN:

Good evening.

My name is22 Guy Parmigian, and I'm a superintendent of the23 Benton-Carroll-Salem local school district.

24 I'm proud to say that the Davis-Besse 25 Nuclear Power Station is located within ourNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 261 geographical border.2 I know I speak for educators across3 northwest Ohio when I say that Davis-Besse serves an4 important role supporting the educational backbone of5 our communities.

6 In fact the plant provides more than 5.87 million dollars,

locally, in annual property taxes8 which provide a direct and substantial benefit to our9 school district.

10 Benton-Carroll-Salem schools is in a11 unique position in that, approximately, 20 percent of12 our revenues are a result of Davis-Besse's operation 13 within the boundaries of our school district.

14 Given the unique relationship between our15 district and the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station I16 would be remiss if I did not discuss how Davis-Besse 17 has been a good neighbor, community minded, and18 invested in the success of our kids at19 Benton-Carroll-Salem schools.20 For example, site vicepresident Ray Lieb,21 and some of his key staff, have committed to meet with22 Benton-Carroll-Salem

leaders, to keep lines of23 communication open that will benefit both of our24 institutions.

25 We have recently had several discussions NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 271 about partnering on different areas that will benefit2 students, such as curriculum

projects, and mentoring.

3 But Davis-Besse's commitment to the4 community goes much further than simply contributing 5 to the tax base.6 The plant's young nuclear professionals 7 have taken on a highly active role in public and8 educational outreach about nuclear power generation.

9 For example, over the past year,10 Davis-Besse hosted two Teach the Teacher events, for11 middle and high school teachers across northwest Ohio.12 About 85 teachers attended these events to13 learn more about the fission process, nuclear power14 plant electric generation, and distribution, and15 careers in nuclear power.16 This program has helped us develop17 enhanced curriculums that embrace science and18 technology, two subjects of ever-increasing importance 19 in our world today.20 Davis-Besse employees also reached out to21 more than 1,000 families, through Bowling Green State22 University's

Science, Technology, Engineering, and23 Math Fair.24 At the Davis-Besse booth children learned25 about nuclear power by dressing in radiation workerNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 281 clothing, generating electricity by cranking a wheel,2 and operating a steam tribune,

turbine, excuse me.3 The Davis-Besse facility has also extended4 a welcoming and transparent hand to college students, 5 and other professional development groups.6 These groups are invited to tour the plant7 on a regular basis and Davis-Besse representatives 8 often visit schools, and other organizations, to9 provide presentations on nuclear power.10 Recently the plant has hosted groups from11 the Ohio State University, Bowling Green State12 University, and the University of Toledo.13 Davis-Besse employees have also organized 14 several fundraisers, earning more than 5,000 dollars,15 to benefit local schools, through events such as a golf16 outing, and a chili cook-off.

17 Continued long-term operation of the plant18 will allow Davis-Besse to maintain its commitment to19 the educational in Ottowa County and beyond, both20 through annual tax contributions, and the public21 outreach activities conducted by its dedicated 22 professionals, who have a stake in the future of our23 students.

24 This is an invaluable contribution to our25 communities that will benefit students for generations NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 291 to come.2 Thank you for the opportunity to share my3 perspective on the benefits of license renewal for the4 Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station.5 FACILITATOR RIVERA: Thank you. Next we6 will have Jamie Grant, followed by Terri Lodge and then7 Dan Rutt.8 MS. GRANT: Good evening.

My name is Jamie9 Beyer Grant, I'm an Ottowa County resident, and10 currently serve as director of the Ottowa County11 Improvement Corporation.

12 I'd like to thank you for the opportunity 13 to share my remarks regarding the environmental impact14 of Davis-Besse as you consider its request for a license15 renewal.16 The Ottowa County Improvement Corporation 17 is the lead economic development agency in the county18 and we are charged with promoting the industrial, 19 economic, commercial, and civic development of Ottowa20 County.21 Our focus is the creation of an22 environment, in Ottowa County and northwest Ohio, where23 existing businesses are able to successfully

complete, 24 and grow, in the world-wide marketplace, and allow us25 to attract new companies to our area.NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 30I One key consideration, in attracting new2 business investments to the area, is the availability 3 of reliable and cost-effective electricity.

4 Over the last few years clients, and5 prospects, that I have worked with have made6 environmental sustainability, and utility reliability 7 a critical component of their location search as they8 look to operate in areas that can provide a number of9 green and reliable options.10 The more than 900 megawatts of power,11 provided through the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power12 Station, helps meet both the cost-effective supply of13 electricity, and the incorporation of the green option14 into those search components.

15 Nuclear energy is the largest source of16 electricity that does not emit air pollution, and the17 only non-emitting source that can produce large amounts18 of electricity around the clock.19 Davis-Besse is an economical, secure,20 energy source that we can depend on 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> a day. It21 isn't subject to the changing weather conditions, 22 unpredictable fuel costs fluctuations, or over23 dependence on foreign suppliers.

24 Davis-Besse is, also, a clean air and25 carbon free generator, that produces no green houseNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 311 gases or air pollutants.

2 According to the U.S. Energy Information 3 Administration, Davis-Besse and its sister site in4 Perry, just east of Cleveland, generate 92 percent of5 the carbon free electricity produced in the state of6 Ohio.7 During the 2013, and '14 winter our region8 experienced significant challenges inherent with some9 alternate fuel sources, including natural gas.10 As an example the Toledo Blade published 11 an article, on January 8th, that examined the effects12 of unusually high residential natural gas usage, which13 resulted in a shortage of gas supply and a temporary 14 halt in production capabilities at a number of gas15 plants.16 And has since, because homes were being17 served with natural gas first, those plants could not18 get enough for their own needs and were shut down19 temporarily.

20 This is just one recent and local example21 of the importance of maintaining a diverse supply of22 fuel for electricity production and the negative23 impacts, on consumers, when limited and unreliable 24 electric supply is our only option.25 In closing, nuclear power must continue toNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 321 produce safe, reliable, electricity as a part of our2 country's diverse energy portfolio.

3 I strongly support the issuance of an4 additional 20 year operating license for Davis-Besse 5 which will afford our region continued production of6 reliable power.7 This is vital to maintaining a business8 friendly environment, not just in Ottawa County, but9 in supporting the prosperity of northwest Ohio.10 Thank you.11 FACILITATOR RIVERA: Thank you. Next we12 will have Terry Lodge, followed by Dan Rutt, and Michael13 Leonardi.

14 MR. LODGE: Good evening, I'm Terry Lodge.15 I brought written comments, a written version of the16 comments I'm going to deliver.

Shall I give them to17 the panel up here? Okay, I will, in a few minutes.18 I must say that I've been opposed to19 nuclear power for 40 years, nearly, and I'm still20 hearing the same propagandistic arguments that I heard21 40 years ago, as to why it is such a great beneficial 22 thing.23 I'm kind of amazed when the economic doom24 and gloom prognosticators appear at these kinds of25 presentations and talk about how if the plant closesNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 331 down all is lost, when there is no discussion about the2 economics and the sustainability, and the reliability 3 of good union jobs in factories, good union jobs in the4 construction and maintenance of solar rays,5 photovoltaic arrays, and wind generators, and6 installers of industrial and commercial conservation 7 technology.

8 That isn't what I came to testify about,9 or to comment about tonight.10 I represent Beyond Nuclear, I'm an11 attorney, represent Beyond Nuclear, Don't Waste12 Michigan, The Green Party of Ohio, and the Citizen's 13 Environmental Alliance of Southwestern Ontario in the14 ongoing license renewal proceeding for Davis-Besse.

15 It is our opinion that circumstances, in16 recent weeks, which have happened in a comparative 17 obscure media environment, have seriously undermined 18 the assumptions that have given rise to the GEIS19 conclusion, the Waste Confidence conclusion, that20 nuclear power plants, like Davis-Besse, can continue21 in operation, generating incredibly lethal waste22 products from fissioning, and that there would be23 adequate measures to contain the dangers from that24 waste for the forever period of time that it will be25 necessary to do so.NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 341 On February 4th, 2014, the assumptions of2 very low probability crumbled at the Energy3 Department's Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, which is, the4 short name is Wipp, W-I-P-P, near Carlsbad, New Mexico.5 A fire in a large underground salt truck6 raged for hours. Ten days later an even more unlikely7 accident

happened, wastes containing plutonium blew8 through WIPP's ventilation system, traveling 2,1509 feet to the surface, contaminating at least 17 workers10 and spreading small amounts of radioactive material11 into the environment.

12 More than a month after the fire the WIPP13 project remains closed. It is for the -- it is for the14 permanent

dumping, the disposition of Department of15 Energy and military radioactive waste.16 What happened underground is unclear at17 this point. It is not known whether the leak and the18 truck fire are connected.

It is not known whether19 there was a waste drum explosion, or the collapse of20 the roof of one of the facility's storage chambers.

21 As DOE contractors are sending robots to22 explore the caverns at WIPP, the future of the world's23 only operating high hazard radioactive waste24 repository is quite uncertain.

25 The problem is, is that table S-3, that isNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 351 -- appears in the NRC regulations, contains a2 discussion of the nuclear fuel waste disposition cycle.3 And it assumes that there will be,4 essentially, perfect containment.

The problem is that5 the DOE has, preliminarily, identified that somebody6 shut off the automatic sprinkler system in the caverns7 at WIPP.8 And now there may be irretrievably, 9 irremediably, radioactive tunnels that will make it10 forever, or at least for a very long and expensive time,11 very difficult to continue to use the facility.

12 I will be leaving my comments.

But I13 understand, of course, that there is the ongoing Waste14 Con rulemaking proceeding.

15 But the point that the intervenors, in16 Davis-Besse, are here to make tonight, is that there17 is serious, recent, new information that calls into18 question table S-3, the very assumption on which plants19 like Davis-Besse are allowed, originally, to be20 licensed and allowed to be, to have their licenses21 renewed.22 That the assumption being we can take care23 of the waste problem, it will be contained, there won't24 be forever problems posed to our children' s children' s,25 children's children.

NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 361 That assumption has been grossly2 undermined.

This facility has only been opened, and3 receiving waste, for about 15 years.4 If it can't make it through the first5 generation, I am very skeptical that there will be a6 problem-free, continuing period, through the7 approximate 2030 time, when the WIPP facility is8 supposed to be full and closed.9 The problem is that Table S-3 presumes that10 a repository built in salt formations is going to be11 stable and that, that presumption, that assumption may12 be about to be undermined for all time.13 Thank you.14 FACILITATOR RIVERA: Thank you. Next we15 will have Dan Rutt, Michael Leonardi, and then Joseph16 DeMare.17 MR. RUTT: I will be reading from my18 written comments, and I timed them out, so they should19 be five minutes.

So if we are getting towards the end20 of that, and getting a little nervous, just ponder that21 the end may be near.22 My name is Dan Rutt. So what are my23 credentials for being here tonight?

I live in the kill24 zone of Davis-Besse.

I have lived in the kill zone of25 nuclear plants almost my entire life.NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 37] I suspect few could argue against the2 mournful reality that way too many people share these3 credentials.

4 I do have a BS in Biology.

Though I must5 confess my BS pales in comparison to the BS of the6 nuclear industry and the NRC.7 I also have a master's degree in public8 health. But I'm not here to debate technical

minutiae, 9 nor to discuss the arrangement of deck chairs, the lack10 of life boats, nor the alleged unsinkability of the11 Titanic nuclear industry.

12 Today I'm here as a poet and an activist.

13 I'm here as a child of mother earth, and as a planetary 14 citizen.

Most importantly, I'm here today as a15 prophet.16 And let it be said nothing today will truer17 be said, than that the nuclear industry, and the NRC18 listens to prophets.

19 I am here to do the impossible.

I'm here20 to topple a multibillion dollar corporate empire, with21 a mere wisp of democracy.

That would be about five22 minute's worth.23 Unfortunately, the NRC's plan to protect24 itself from democracy is much stronger than its plan25 to protect us from nuclear disasters.

NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 381 When the NRC circus comes to town, their2 death defying press editations may very well make you3 gasp.12:15:38.

4 Still we will be safely confined to5 grandstanding.

This dog and pony show might allow us6 to bitch until we are hoarse. But at the end of the7 day, the elephant in the middle of the big, flimsy, tent8 will do its thing.9 And the little people of this world will10 be left with the mess. And the NRC circus will skip town11 to continue their tour de farce.12 So I'm here to do the impossible.

I'm here13 to speak for a thousand generations in five minutes.14 Usually such hope and possibility requires a venue of15 something like American Idol.16 Well, my friends, we have an American Idol,17 the nuclear industry.

This American Idol has reigned18 for 70 years. This American Idol has reigned the19 nuclear waste across this great land.20 And today, 70 years later, as the waste of21 the nuclear fat cats grows larger, they offer a 600 page22 tome as their litter. Who dares weigh through this23 litter box?24 Who dares think inside this box? Who of25 us will not be pooped out? Can anyone venturing intoNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 391 this 600 page tomb view it as anything but a deathly2 undertaking?

3 What box can possibly hold such an4 internally reigning transgression?

Do you happen to5 have a staff member called Pandora, by any chance?6 There is only one sane solution, let' s idle7 this idol. The solution is simple, we must end nuclear8 generations to end nuclear generations.

9 The ultimate question for today is, is our10 call to shut Davis-Besse down, in that call will we be11 heard?12 Sure, NRC staff will herd our comments into13 another neatly formatted tome. But will we be heard?14 Sure, the decisionmakers have ears, and stenographers, 15 and word processors, but in the end will we be heard?16 Will the people affected by nuclear power17 generation be heard? They call this a public hearing.18 But the reality is that it is physically, and19 metaphysically, impossible for over 99 percent of those20 affected by Davis-Besse's nuclear waste, to be here,21 for the simple fact that they have not even been born22 yet.23 Will we weigh the testimony, today, to24 account for their interest, the interest of future25 generations?

Can you hear our great-grandchildren cryNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 401 out, into the not so-great years of today's nuclear2 executives, why did you poison our world for a few3 kilowatts?

4 Can you hear our great,5 great-grandchildren cry into the not so great years of6 today's First Energy shareholders, why did you rob our7 future for a few profits for today?8 Can you hear our great, great,9 great-grandchildren cry into the not so-great years,10 of today's parade of crooning cronies sometimes called11 politicians, why did you sell out your communities for12 a little patronage?

13 But what if we were truly heard today? And14 we just might hear something a little bit different.

15 Perhaps the gentle whispers of our great, great, great,16 great, great grandchildren saying, good job, to the17 employees of the former nuclear industry.

18 And by good job they don't mean thanks for19 taking a decent paying job but, rather, holding out and20 demanding jobs, jobs friendly to both working families21 and our environment.

22 If we are truly heard today, then we might23 just hear the gentle whispers of our great, great,24 great, great, great, great grandchildren, thanking the25 nameless thousands across this great land, who workedNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 411 for neither wages, nor shareholder profits but, rather,2 worked freely for a world where it doesn't pay to3 destroy our environment.

4 We must listen to our future generations.

5 If not us, who? If not now, when? As for me, in this6 generation, I will gladly live without Davis-Besse.

I7 will gladly trade the sliver of energy produced, during8 my lifetime, to spare thousands of generations the9 poison of nuclear waste.10 Though make no mistake.

Even if the11 problem of nuclear waste disposal was somehow12 miraculously solved, I would still gladly trade this13 energy source, simply to avoid the probability of a14 nuclear catastrophe, from the safety disaster that15 Davis-Besse has so proven. Shut it down.16 Please listen to the prophets who seek the17 good of all, not the prophets which only enrich the few18 at the expense of the 99 percent.

Thank you.19 FACILITATOR RIVERA: Thank you. Our next20 speaker is Michael Leonardi, followed by Joseph DeMare,21 and then Michael Keegan.22 MR. LEONARDI:

I think Dan summed it up all23 pretty well right there. And I just want to bring24 attention to a couple of things, to the NRC.25 You mentioned, in the draft there, thatNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 421 there are no studies, that have been published in well2 recognized scientific

journals, which I don't3 understand what that, the definition of that is.4 But there are some studies that I would5 recommend that you look at, on the causative effects6 of the operation of nuclear power plants and public7 health.8 One is a recent report that came out just9 after this one was published on the 26th of February, 10 was when you guys published this. This came out March11 3rd, 2014, and its title is, A Report of Health Status12 of the California Residents in San Luis Obispo, and13 Santa Barbara Counties, Living Near the Diablo Canyon14 Nuclear Reactors Located in Avila Beach, California.

15 That is the title.16 And that does show a high probability of17 the causative effect on increased health risks in those18 counties.

In fact it shows they do this baby tooth19 study, that I'm sure you have heard about, that shows20 that strontium 90 levels, in baby teeth, in those two21 counties, are 30.8 percent greater than the average for22 the rest of California.

23 The study is done by Dr. Joe Mangano, who24 is from the organization called Radiation and Public25 Health.NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 431 There is also a study written by Dr. Gordon2 Edwards, from Canada, on the effects of tritium, which3 I think is -- I don't have the title of it with me, but4 I recommend that one as well, Dr. Gordon Edwards and5 tritium.6 If you just google it I'm sure it will come7 up. It is over a couple of decades old, I think.8 Really that is all I wanted to address to9 the NRC. But I would like to say some more after10 hearing some of the comments tonight.11 I think the previous comments before Terry12 and Dan, were, exemplify the fact that we live in what13 many of us call a corporateteocracy.

And I really, I'm14 an educator, and it was really gut wrenching to hear15 the superintendent, and I'm sorry, to do such a16 disservice to the children that you represent.

17 It is really sad. And I find it really18 despicable, and I get angry about it, because I have19 a five year old daughter, and I live between Fermi and20 Davis-Besse, and there are piles of radioactive waste21 piling up all around us.22 And it makes me literally sick to my23 stomach.

And that is why I don't look at you guys as24 good people. I think you can be good people. But you25 really have to change the way you are now.NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 4412345678910111213141516171819202122232425You can't just continue to put jobs first.It is despicable, really, disgusting.

It is aparasitic

-- you don't see yourselves as parasites, butthat is exactly what you are, parasites.

FACILITATOR RIVERA: Sir, sir. I'm sorryto --MR. LEONARDI:

It is a parasitic

--FACILITATOR RIVERA: -- interrupt you --MR. LEONARDI:

relationship.

FACILITATOR RIVERA: But I would ask thatyou please be respectful.

MR. LEONARDI:

Is not insulting, is itinsulting to use parasitic relationship?

That is whatit is.FACILITATOR RIVERA: Sir.MR. LEONARDI:

That is the relationship unions --FACILITATOR RIVERA: Sir, I'm asking youbetween theto --MR. LEONARDI:

-- and First Energy, thatis a relationship between the school district andDavis-Besse, it is a parasitic relationship.

Look upthe definition of it, that is what it is.The Port Authority

--FACILITATOR RIVERA: Sir --NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 451 MR. LEONARDI:

-- what a disgrace.

And2 this is the leadership

--3 FACILITATOR RIVERA: -- you are done.4 MR. LEONARDI:

-- and this is the5 leadership that we are faced with, a corporate takeover6 of our democracy.

7 The NRC, I'm sorry, you guys did your work.8 The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board ruled that our9 contention should be heard on the replacement power of10 solar and wind.II The NRC Commissioners overturned it12 unanimously.

It is a disgusting situation that we live13 in, in this country.

A disgrace, when we have morons,14 like John McCain saying --15 FACILITATOR RIVERA: Sir, again, I need to16 remind you --17 MR. LEONARDI:

-- we need nuclear power,18 okay I will --19 FACILITATOR RIVERA: -- that this --20 MR. LEONARDI:

-- stop, thank you so21 much.22 FACILITATOR RIVERA: Everyone, I would23 like to remind you that we would like to maintain a24 respectful environment.

Please do eliminate your25 personal attacks.NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 461 Thank you for your comments.

Next we will2 have Joseph DeMare, followed by Michael Keegan, and3 then Pat Marida.4 MR. DEMARE: It is Joseph DeMare. And I'd5 like to, oddly enough, begin by complimenting the NRC.6 This Draft Environmental Impact Statement is much, much7 better, than the one that was presented to us four years8 ago.9 It is obvious you have been working.10 Unfortunately this one is, also, riddled with errors.11 It has errors of judgement, errors of omission, and12 errors of fact.13 I am working with a group of people who are14 churning through the 681 pages, right now. Just15 ordinary people with no technical background.

So it16 is taking us a little while.17 But we are finding things, we are finding18 some things that are seriously wrong with this19 document.

20 In the area of errors of judgment, 21 discussing the tritium leaks that happened, and have22 happened, and may still be happening at Davis-Besse, 23 the -- there is a description of the measurements of24 tritium, and it shows a graph of how they were high,25 and then they went low, and they went up again, and thenNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 47I they went down.2 And then the NRC, in this report, says3 that, well we have a plausible explanation for this4 leakage.

Plausible explanation is not a high enough5 standard to protect any of us from tritium pollution.

6 Tritium has a half-life of about 12 years.7 And so the tritium that leaked from the plant and is8 now in the Lake Erie system, and in our fish, and in9 our drinking water, that will be around for 100 years,10 causing problems for us and our descendants.

11 And having a plausible explanation for why12 the plant is leaking is not satisfactory.

We need to13 know why it is leaking in order to say, with any14 confidence, that it won't continue to leak over the next15 20 years, if we re-license the plant.16 Another error in judgment, a number of the17 comments on the original Environmental Impact18 Statement, talked about the cost, the high cost of19 nuclear power compared to the cost of solar power, and20 wind power which have both continued, solar and wind,21 to become more and more inexpensive.

22 They have been getting cheaper and cheaper23 over the past four years, at an accelerating rate, while24 the cost of nuclear has been increasing.

25 When asked to consider this, in the reportNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 481 the author say that cost is not considered in the DEIS2 because that is not part of what they are supposed to3 do.4 But I think that the cost of electricity 5 has a direct impact on all of our socioeconomic well6 being. And socioeconomic well being is something that7 the NRC is required to protect.8 Wind and solar are becoming the cheapest9 form of electrical generation.

That is one reason they10 are the fastest growing form of electrical generation 11 in the world.12 Some errors of omission.

Some comments13 were made about the algae blooms that we are14 experiencing here in Lake Erie. The NRC has said that15 there have been no reports of algae blooms near16 Davis-Besse.

17 Well, I have to tell you, it is here. I18 have personally seen it. I may not publish my reports19 in any journals, but I have been to the Ottawa Wildlife20 Refuge, and the local refuges, and I have seen piles21 of algae on the shoreline.

22 So it needs to be considered.

And not23 considering it as an error of omission.

24 One of the largest, probably the biggest25 and most serious errors of omission, I'm quoting now:NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 491 No studies to date, that are accepted by the nothings2 leading scientific authorities that indicate a3 causative relationship between radiation dose from4 nuclear power facilities, and cancer in the general5 public exists.6 In other words, you are saying there aren' t7 any studies linking living near a nuclear power plant8 to increased rates of cancer. And you list a number9 of studies that seem to indicate there isn't.10 Well, the omission is the many, manyII studies which do show a link between living near a12 nuclear power plant and increased cancer rates.13 I'm only going to name a few here, but there14 are many. One of them, one of the most famous is the15 KIKK study from Germany.

In German it is called16 Kindesalter in Der Umbegung Westdeutscher 17 Kerntechnisher Anlagen.18 It sounds funny when I try to pronounce it,19 but it is a serious study. It shows that leukemia rates20 doubled within a five kilometer range of a nuclear power21 plant.22 In 2012 the French government, I was going23 to say, it is not easy to find studies that show that24 your technology causes cancer, when your living depends25 on that technology.

NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 501 But somehow France managed to do it, even2 though it is an incredibly nuclear dependent country,3 they published a study, it is called "The Childhoood 4 Leukemia Around French Nuclear Plants",

and it was5 published in the International Journal of Cancer, in6 2012.7 This study found, also, that leukemia8 rates for children doubled around nuclear power plants.9 And here in the United States we have a10 tireless researcher, by the name of Dr. Joe Mangano,11 that a previous speaker alluded to. He has published 12 32 peer reviewed articles in various publications 13 around the country, and around the world, that show14 living near a nuclear plant increases, usually doubles15 the rates of cancer.16 Now, going back to your statement, in your17 thing, you say that they indicate a causative 18 relationship between radiation and cancer.19 Well it is impossible, literally 20 impossible to follow a particular atom of radioactive 21 iodine, from the plant's vents, into the air, into the22 lungs, or into the foodstuff, like a corn plant, of the23 people nearby, and then into the body of a child, and24 then into that child's pituitary.

25 And then watch that atom explode and damageNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 511 that child's pituitary gland. You cannot follow a2 particular atom as it causes cancer. And, frankly, if3 you could you shouldn't.

You should stop that atom4 before it gets into the pituitary gland, if you had that5 ability,

somehow, magically.

6 And there is magical thinking here. The7 question to ask, when you are evaluating, here we have8 some studies that show no cancer increases, and here9 we have studies that show there is cancer increases.

10 How do you decide which are right? Well,11 you ask some basic questions.

One basic question to12 ask is, how can we put radioactive atoms into the13 environment, atoms that are known to cause cancer, and14 destroy cells, when they explode?15 How can we put that into the environment 16 and not cause cancer? I don't have a mechanism.

Maybe17 the NRC does have a mechanism.

Maybe there are18 radioactive fairies that catch them, and keep them away19 from us.20 But, believe it or not, even though I am21 an environmentalist, I do not believe in fairies.22 Finally, there are errors of fact. I'm23 going to start with a trivial one, just because it24 affected me personally.

In the original document I'm25 identified as speaker number 14, and at one point I am,NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 521 I made a comment about the effect of the hot water2 discharge, from the plant, and how that affects3 invasive species.4 Because I believe warming the water5 encourages invasive

species, such as the grass carp.6 I was kind of surprised to see that you listed me as7 having said indicia species which is a word I didn't8 even know existed, until I saw it. It means9 indicators.

It is the plural of the word indicators.

10 So thank you for expanding my vocabulary 11 but that is not what I said. I'm talking about invasive12 species.13 And, finally, one of the things that we are14 contending, I'm representing the Ohio Green Party, and15 we are part of the contention

process, is that16 alternative energy can replace Davis-Besse, we do not17 need the Davis-Besse generation.

18 And there was talk, earlier, about 700 jobs19 here. Well, there are 3,000 jobs at risk in20 Perrisburg, at the First Solar Plant.21 We are at a point where we have to choose.22 Will we choose clean energy sources, like solar and23 wind, with thousands, tens of thousands of jobs, or will24 we continue to use nuclear power with hundreds and25 dozens of jobs?NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 53I Wind and solar are replacing nuclear power2 in countries like Germany and in other countries around3 the world. It is simply a fact of history.

It can be4 done.5 It takes additional technology, you have6 to be more aware of your grid, you have to have better7 meteorology so you can predict wind speeds. But it is8 happening all over the place.9 And the point at which our contention was10 denied, by the -- it was accepted by the ASLB, but denied11 by the Commissioners, was a study that Davis-Besse, 12 that FENOC actually cited.13 This study, FENOC said, shows that wind14 can't provide baseload power like Davis-Besse does.15 Well, we read the study. And at the end, in the16 conclusion, the author clearly said, this shows wind17 power can provide base load power.18 So that was the point at which we pointed19 out to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, you can't20 quote a study that says the opposite of what you claim21 and, you know, dismiss our contention.

22 So the ASLB agreed to hear it. They didn't23 rule in our favor, they didn't make their decision, they24 just said, okay, we will hear what you have to say on25 this subject.NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 541 And the Commissioners vetoed that, they2 voted unanimously to overturn that decision, violating 3 your own processes, violating the appearance of4 democracy that the NRC provides.

5 And that is unacceptable, especially when6 we are talking about something which is factually true.7 And that is that wind and solar can replace nuclear.8 And, so, for my conclusion, I don't think9 I'm over five minutes yet. Okay. I want to make the10 effects of nuclear energy a little more personal.

11 I want you to imagine a girl born about 80012 years from now. She is born without limbs. She is13 born without limbs because a radioactive atom affected14 her just as she was being conceived.

A radioactive 15 atom generated by Davis-Besse.

16 This little girl doesn't know any of us.17 Has not benefitted, in any way, from the electricity 18 that we are now benefitting from, from Davis-Besse.

19 She didn't ask to be born without limbs.20 She will have a life full of suffering because of what21 we are doing here, today. Every time I see a nuclear22 power plant running, knowing that it is generating 23 wastes which will be affecting our descendants, not24 just my descendants, your descendants too, I am25 ashamed.NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 5512 FACILITATOR RIVERA: Thank you. Next we3 will have Michael Keegan, followed by Pat Marida, and4 then Alicia Rivers.5 MR. KEEGAN: Michael Keegan, from Monroe,6 Michigan.

I'm with the group Don't Waste Michigan.

We7 are, indeed, legal intervenors in the licensing 8 proceedings on the Davis-Besse.

9 I did participate back in the scoping10 process.

And as I review the SDEIS, they sliced and11 diced away my comments, but didn't seem to adequately 12 address them, in my mind.13 What was particularly

lacking, and14 bothersome, is how alternative energy was pooh pooed,15 and can't have it, can't -- won't be baseload.

And yet16 we are seeing it, it is happening now in real time.17 Just this past week a company came forward18 and said they were going to be building 300 megawatts 19 of wind energy in Ohio and it would be up within 12 to20 18 months. It is doable.21 Just this week the interconnected grid,22 the largest grid in the U.S. said they could easily23 accommodate 30 percent wind and solar brought onto the24 grid.25 The alternative of First Energy seekingNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 561 out alternative energy that they don't generate, that2 they could bring in through the grid, was not brought3 into consideration.

4 This is a self-serving economic game here.5 And there's vested interest.

I understand there are6 a lot of good jobs, paying jobs. But there will be more7 jobs in a renewable and alternative kind of economy,8 because those jobs are labor intensive.

9 Whereas jobs in the nuclear industry are10 capital intensive, you get very few jobs for the money11 you spent.12 Much of what I had planned to present13 tonight was on the new information coming out on the14 high burnup fuel that is being utilized at reactors15 around the U.S. that initially began in the early '90s.16 And I see, from a document that Davis-Besse 17 was authorized, according to amendment number 213, to18 move to a fuel cycle which lasted 730 days. What19 happens is the fuel gets super burnt up, becomes super20 hot, radioactively, and super hot thermally, decay.21 And it embrittles the actual cladding22 around the fuel rods. So when you pull it out of the23 spent fuel pool and go to put it in dry cask storage,24 you have a multitude of problems.

25 It is not known how this will respond inNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 571 a Yucca Mountain, or some other proposal.

So the whole2 entire industry, for two decades, has been operating 3 blind, and going about generating high burnup fuel.4 I would like to know exactly when did5 Davis-Besse begin their high burnup fuel cycles, and6 if indeed they will be projected to go for 20 additional 7 years of high burnup fuel cycles, when it is not known8 what to do with this waste that wasn't considered in9 the beginning.

10 I'm going to leave with you a document, 11 generated by a Dr. Marvin Resnikoff, within the last12 month or so, speaking about the high burnup nuclear fuel13 and how problematic it is, and it was never taken into14 consideration.

15 I also had problems with how the issue of16 flooding has been addressed.

And I don't believe it17 properly has. Lake Erie is known for its seisches that18 is where the wind, straight line wind blow the lake out,19 and it sloshes back and forth, back and forth.20 In fact the recent storm, in 2012, on the21 East Coast, created a lot of havoc on the Great Lakes,22 and there were seisches, over on Lake Michigan, of 3023 feet high.24 There have been sashes, historically, 25 which have been 30 feet, 40 feet high. There have beenNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 581 recent seisches, over near Cleveland area, that2 actually came up and pulled people into the water.3 It does happen. I would like to reflect4 back in 1972, when the Davis-Besse was underwater for5 nearly a month. But what I'm guaranteed, there is an6 elevation of 591, and the lake knows when to stop, and7 it does not come over that elevation.

8 So the whole of flooding has been9 inadequately addressed, and has been swept under the10 rug.11 So I, I'm disappointed in that my comments12 got sliced and diced. I'm vehemently opposed to this13 nuclear power plant. Certainly there has been some14 economic

activity, it has been a boon to the region.15 But the potential loss, the potential risk16 of losing an area the size of Pennsylvania, the hundreds17 of billions of dollars of property damage, hundreds of18 thousands of lives impacted, it is just a cost that we19 don't need to go into, we don't need to go down that20 road.21 To generate one more ounce of nuclear waste22 is immoral, because we do not know what to do with what23 we have. All we have gotten was a Waste Confidence, 24 a con game, we will figure out what to do with it later.25 Now, many people look at Yucca Mountain, NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 591 what a failure Yucca Mountain was. Yucca Mountain is2 a tremendous success because for 27 years it kept the3 lie alive, that you knew what to do with it, you don't.4 You are just kicking it down the road, it5 is immoral what you are doing. It is now known you6 don't know what to do with it.7 And I would argue that the Nuremberg 8 principles do apply here, today, in the actions that9 decisionmakers make going forward.

Because it is not10 based on science.11 It is based on economic

drivers, and now12 we are looking at a plant that has just invested close13 to 6, 700 million dollars, on steam generators, which14 have not been scrutinized, which could not have been15 scrutinized, which Incadel 690 issue could have not16 been known, because it wasn't realized in two years ago.17 The NRC did that on the oversight.

The18 utility relied on an in-house

studies, of 50/5919 processing, same, same, just checking it out, same20 piece of equipment going in.21 The steam generators that came out weighed22 590 tons. The ones that are going in weigh 465 tons.23 That is not same for same.24 So the NRC oversight, there has been a25 meltdown, there is no credibility with the NuclearNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 601 Regulatory Commission.

And we see the inadequacy of2 the quality assurance of the Nuclear Regulatory 3 Commission, when we realized, on Valentine's Day, we4 learn about a 25 foot gap in the concrete that is 12,5 6, 6 inches to 12 inches wide, 25 feet long. This is6 when the plant was crawling with inspectors.

7 And we were told that the cracks were not8 propagating, and everything was being looked at. A9 simple ultrasound would have found that.10 But for over two years the NRC allowed themII to operate that and only found it when they came in to12 cut a fourth hole into that shield building, which does13 not meet the design criteria, does not meet seismic14 qualification, which will crumble around that primary15 containment and, potentially, tip into the reactor.16 So the NRC has no credibility in this17 process, whatsoever.

Their ethics are their wallet,18 next to their science, and I'm sorry but this is a very19 sad process.

And I will be vehemently oppose this20 plant, and I will follow it into the future.21 FACILITATOR RIVERA: Thank you. Next we22 will have Pat Marida, followed by Alicia Rivers. And23 if there are any other cards, in the audience, that need24 to be picked up, or if you need a card, if you could25 just raise your hand?NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 611 MS. MARIDA: Hi, I'm Pat Marida, and I'm2 the Chair of the Ohio Sierra Club's Nuclear Free3 Committee.

4 And I would like to address two -- we have5 seen the big company piped in, and they bring in 600,6 how many, 1,000 workers come in, and they move into your7 town, and then nobody thinks about what is going to8 happen when there is even more people out of employment, 9 if something

happens, and the plant shuts down.10 This is the problem with these bigII centralized energy sources.

That is why we are in12 favor of more decentralized.

13 So in talking about the GEIS, and the14 preliminary recommendation says that there is not15 enough adverse environmental impacts to deny the16 license renewal, the Sierra Club does not agree with17 that.18 The NRC has wholly failed to acknowledge 19 public concerns, as well as hard science, about the20 dangers of current and future radioactive 21 contamination, and about nuclear power being a dated22 technology.

23 So in reviewing the supplement, the NRC24 must revisit contentions that the electricity can be25 readily replaced.

And we have heard others talk aboutNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 621 this.2 But we are asking that the NRC review Emory3 Levens, and Mahajani's articles and books, on how both4 carbon and nuclear can be replaced with renewables by5 2050.6 So efficiency, and a slowdown of the7 economy have resulted in a drop in electric demand.8 And this confirms that trends of the past cannot be9 reliably extrapolated into the future while our10 continued demand for electricity.

11 So the concept of baseload is also a relic12 of the past. And centralized power sources, which with13 unwieldy and unreliable grids, they are a relic of the14 20th century.15 The nation is rapidly moving toward a more16 decentralized, and I must say, democratized and17 sustainable energy sourcing.

18 New jobs, energy jobs will be created by19 the people, where they already live, they won't be20 moving here, and have to be moving here and there.21 There will be clean safe jobs, where no one22 needs to wear radiation detection badges. And we23 talked about the new wind farm that is coming down the24 pike.25 The NRC must also address the most seriousNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 631 issue of nuclear reactors outside of an accident, or2 meltdown, which is of course, the radioactive waste.3 And longer, it will be here longer than4 First Energy, it will be here longer than the United5 States government.

And it will be here longer than6 anything resembling the civilization that we now have7 today.8 So kicking the radioactive can down the9 road, saddling future generations with the problems, 10 and the expense of isolating these, our generation's 11 nuclear waste is irresponsible at best, and criminal12 at worst.13 So the NRC must address the environmental 14 impact of Davis-Besse's waste, for the next few hundred15 generations.

16 And the whole business of when the Waste17 Confidence was overturned, by the Court, that meant it18 should be overturned, they should drop it, they should19 start looking at the waste.20 But no, they wrote a new, they are writing21 a new one. So that as soon as they can pass this new22 one, then they can go ahead and license everything that23 is waiting.

And it is just not the way it should go,24 it should happen.25 The NRC should drop the waste confidence NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 641 and start looking at the waste.2 The Sierra -- well, we talked about --3 there was talk about the high burnup waste, and the4 Sierra Club would like the NRC to look at the high burnup5 waste.6 And when the engineers aren' t even sure how7 to handle this hotter than ever, hotter than imagined8 waste.9 The Sierra Club, we have signed on to the10 principles for safeguarding nuclear waste at reactors.

II So what that, what those organizations that have signed12 on to that have, what it has said, it must be stored13 as close, as safely possible, to the site of generation.

14 It can't be left on Prairie Island, in the15 middle of the Mississippi River. You know, those16 places, it must be moved off of there.17 But it can't, at the same time, it can't18 be moved out to Nevada, because that increases the risk19 of accidents along the way.20 And the waste must not be put where it21 cannot be retrieved, and resealed.

So what we are22 talking about is a rolling custody of the waste for23 generations to come.24 We are also looking, I'd like to mention25 the possibility of the contamination, radioactive NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 651 contamination of the fresh water of Lake Erie, and maybe2 Lake Ontario, and maybe the Great Lakes.3 And any of these reactors, any of the 374 reactors in the watershed of the Great Lakes could cause5 serious damage to our lakes. It never should have been6 allowed to happen.7 So -- and what happened at Fukushima, you8 know, there was one chance in 100 billion that three9 reactors would melt down at the same time, and it10 happened.

11 So all, a lot of unimagined scenarios have12 happened

already, and continue to take place. And,13 unfortunately, Davis-Besse is located where it has the14 potential to contaminate the waters of Lake Erie for15 an eternity, actually.

16 So we would ask the NRC to take special17 notice of the dangers of exposing our nation to the risk18 of losing Great Lakes' water.19 The NRC should address, look at routine20 radioactive

releases, that was mentioned before.21 There are tritium leaks, and so forth.22 The NRC must address the increasing 23 brittleness of the metal, and the cement, when it is24 in contact with the radioactivity, as the years25 progress.

NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 661 Also the cracking of the shield building, 2 and the determination that the cracks were the result3 of the blizzard of '78 was proved to be inaccurate, 4 because the cracks are now widening, which cracks do5 over time.6 Which most people would have figured that,7 would have thought that that would be the conclusion, 8 and that was what happened.

9 And the fourth cutting of through the10 shield building that will weaken that. And as one11 engineer put it, the shield building will hold up just12 fine until something stresses it.13 So, and then we have heard about the 25 foot14 gap. So we are trying to imagine how this could happen,15 when multiple inspectors, supposedly on the job all the16 time, and then also who knows how to pour concrete17 there?18 I mean, that is pretty -- that should have19 been a pretty routine and regular thing. So how, how20 does a mistake like that happen at a nuclear power plant21 is incredible, I'm incredulous about that, too.22 So personally I'm a volunteer, I'm not paid23 to be here, like FENOC or the NRC. I spend my own gas24 money to drive up from Columbus.

I spend my retirement 25 days and evenings, also, attempting to keep the worldNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 671 a safer place for my grandchildren.

2 I'm a registered pharmacist, I'm a health3 professional.

And myself, along with many others, who4 have no vested interest in, monetary interest in5 Davis-Besse.

6 We have no vested monetary interest.

We7 would expect our words to be weighted more heavily than8 those who have monetary

concerns, because they would9 have a certain prejudice, just because of the money10 involved.

11 So people, many ordinary people here, who12 have ideas, and critical information, and then to have13 it dismissed, simply because they are not in a position14 to conform to the legalistic process that is undertaken 15 here.16 So somebody that has really good important 17 value and information, the NRC can simply say, well that18 is not one of the things that was mentioned a year and19 a half back, so you can't bring that up, something new.20 We are not listening to anything new.21 And especially when we are talking about22 radioactivity, long-lasting dangerous radioactivity.

23 So I would also expect that the comments of the skilled24 professionals would not be dismissed, by the NRC25 Commissioners, after the Atomic Safety and Licensing NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 681 Board agreed with the Petitioners.

2 So -- the last thing I want to talk about3 was that the -- if I read this right, it says that, the4 supplement says that it has relied on consultation with5 the tribes.6 And so with that consultation with the7 tribes, if I read this right, said consisted of writing8 letters to eight tribes, seven of which letters went9 unanswered.

10 So we would like the NRC to have actual11 dialogue with all of these eight tribes. And dialogue12 should take place at, or close to, the tribal location, 13 where the Native American cultural traditions can be14 respected, and where they don't have to drive long15 distances, or whatever.

16 So thank you.17 FACILITATOR RIVERA: Thank you. Next we18 are going to hear from Alicia Rivers, followed by19 Valerie Crow and Kevin Garn.20 MS. RIVERS: My name is Alicia Rivers and21 I'm from Columbus, Ohio. And fortunately everybody 22 else has said most of what I was going to say so this23 will be very brief.24 One thing that surprised me, about what was25 said tonight, is that the impact that is expected forNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 691 surface water, and groundwater, from a license renewal2 by Davis-Besse, would be very small.3 And I just wonder how, in this world, after4 our experience with Fukushima, and with what we know5 of climate change, we could possibly be saying6 something like that now.7 We know that even in our cities, our8 infrastructure for handling floods is not good enough.9 So what happens when Davis-Besse experiences some of10 those rising water levels?11 And is it going to be anything like it is12 at Fukushima, which has now poured hundreds of13 thousands of gallons of radioactive water into the14 ocean?15 Is there a mechanism that will absolutely 16 guarantee us that Lake Erie will not have that same17 experience from some of the climate change that we are18 likely to experience here?19 Second, it seems to me that based on the20 uncertainty that we are facing, with the changes that21 are going to come about, as our climate changes, we22 can't be sure of anything.

23 And that if there is something that we24 could depend on, it would be that things would get25 better if we would reduce risks.NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 70I So the best thing that we could do, for our2 environment, for our health, for the safety of our3 children, and our world, is to find ways to reduce risk.4 And everything I see happening, that5 involves nuclear energy, nuclear waste, raises risk6 exponentionally.

Is it going to get better?7 It seems to me that anything that we do to8 prolong nuclear energy, and nuclear weapons9 production, in this world is going to hasten the worst10 for us, rather than the best.11 I would have thought that maybe, when I12 moved to Ohio, from South Carolina, I would find things13 better up here. I had an experience, working at the14 Savannah River site, in South Carolina.

15 And I'm sorry to say what I overheard, from16 some engineers who were working there, actually I was17 working for them, they had been to Hanford to learn how18 to do what they were going to do at the site in South19 Carolina.

20 We now know, of course, that Hanford is the21 most polluted place in this country.

I have just heard22 that the high level waste, that was going to be trucked23 from Canada, partly trucked from Canada, all the way24 to the Savannah River site for storage, has been put25 on hold because someone passed along the word that theNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 711 capacity, at the Savannah River site is not going to2 accommodate any more waste.3 And that goes back to what I heard those4 engineers saying when I was there. They were saying5 I don't know how we can, we can do the same thing that6 they have done at Hanford.

The geology here is7 different.

8 They went ahead and tried it. Those pools9 are now leaking.

They are so full that they cannot10 accommodate any more of this waste, that was going to11 be trucked down there.12 So when I came up here I thought I would13 find things a little different.

Maybe people up here14 know how to keep things safer. And then I find out that15 Davis-Besse' s record is not only really bad for safety,16 but it is not knowingly being made better, it seems.17 Or we wouldn't have just found that gap18 that certainly shouldn't have passed muster at any19 point. Things are not getting better here. They can20 only get worse here.21 And, finally, the WIPP that Terry Lodge22 referred to earlier, out in New Mexico where my only23 grandchildren live, helps us know what is likely to be24 happening to our air.25 Those folks who were working out there,NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 721 those workers for that facility, didn't expect to be2 breathing in radioactive particles that would damage3 their health.4 And that same air is likely to be blown a5 little north to Albuquerque.

And so much of the6 radioactivity out west has been blown all over the7 place, and has contaminated so many lives, and so much8 land.9 I just wonder how we can live with10 ourselves, how can we consider ourselves to be ethical11 and humane creatures, when we continue making nuclear12 waste, and distributing it all over the planet?13 My children, I'm afraid, aren't going to14 be able to find a single foot of ground, in this earth,15 that is safe for them to be on, or air safe to breathe.16 And Davis-Besse's license extension isn't17 going to help that problem.

It will exacerbate it.18 Thank you.19 FACILITATOR RIVERA: Thank you. I would20 now like to offer the podium to Valerie Crow, followed21 by Kevin Garn.22 MS. CROW: My name is Valerie Crow. I23 watched Davis-Besse being built, and I have had the same24 objection, the entire time, since before they built it,25 what are you going to do with the waste?NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 731 If you can't answer that question it was2 why were we building these plants, this one especially?

3 And so close to the source of water that we all use.4 I live in Michigan now, but my water comes5 from Toledo, which comes from lake Erie. I'm concerned 6 that we have storage that is going to stay at this plant7 forever.8 How is that going to -- how are we going9 to protect the lake? Davis-Besse has a pretty lousy10 safety record, actually.

We act like there is some11 kind of a lack of ways to move forward, but we have12 renewable energy, we can generate enough power.13 We are doing it now, Davis-Besse is not14 running, and we still have lights. In my Native15 American background we say that we are here to make16 decisions, and we should be thinking about the next17 seven generations coming after us, in all our18 decisions.

19 And if we cannot, in clear conscience, say20 that there is going to be a better outcome, or good21 outcome, then we shouldn't be doing these things.22 A lot of what I hear being said here, this23 seems like it is all about the money. Well, if we24 destroy anything no amount of money is going to bring25 that back. Thank you.NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 741 FACILITATOR RIVERA: Thank you. Our next2 speaker is Kevin Garn. And if there is anyone else in3 the audience that needs a card, or has a card, please4 raise it.5 MR. GARN: Good evening, my name is Kevin6 Gar.7 I served two tours in the Marines, running8 computerized payroll systems, and went to work for9 Davis-Besse.

Five years I spent with the Marines was10 nothing compared to what I have seen at Davis-Besse.

11 801805 Revision 27 gave the plant manager12 permission to override QA. I reported it to the NRC.13 The NRC says we need this many, this much time to14 investigate.

15 When I called the NRC back they had lost16 the file. Senators Metzembaum and Glenn became17 involved, and the NRC decided to open the case again.18 There were three violations and a fine of 275,00019 dollars.20 I thought this was the United States of21 America.

I didn't know utility companies could tell22 people not to go to the NRC. I thought this was the23 land of the home of the free and the brave.24 Davis-Besse is an old plant. As it ages25 more accidents will happen. I'm against this renewal,NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 751 and I don't think it is right. Thank you for your time.2 FACILITATOR RIVERA: Thank you. Our next3 speaker is Chuck McCune.4 MR. McCUNE: Good evening, my name is5 Chuck McCune, I'm an electrician for Local 8, with the6 International Brotherhood of Electrical

Workers, those7 bad guys.8 I have been working this electrical 9 industry for over 34 years. My brothers and sisters10 built this facility over 35 years ago, with a lot of11 pride, and a lot of hard work.12 This plant has been the livelihood for many13 of my brothers and sisters, for that time. We are14 tradesmen, and tradeswomen, who install the backup15 systems, the backup to the backup systems, the safety16 systems, the radiation detection

systems, the17 emergency shutdown

systems, and many more.18 These systems have all been installed, and19 upgraded, many times for the safety of this plant, its20 personnel, the community and the environment.

21 The work we have done, at this facility, 22 is of the highest quality because of two things. First23 the management has the highest standards for human24 performance of any work on the site.25 And, second, we all live in this area. IfNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 761 we felt that there was a problem with this facility, 2 we would be the first to bring this to the public's3 awareness.

4 Because of First Energy's highest5 standards, and a commitment to excellence in the6 nuclear industry, we feel that an extension of this7 licensing is a positive step forward, and it should be8 granted to First Energy. Thank you.9 FACILITATOR RIVERA: Thank you. Are10 there any other cards in the audience that need to be11 collected?

12 (No response.)

13 FACILITATOR RIVERA: Having none I would14 like to offer the opportunity, to John Lubinski, to15 offer a few remarks.16 MR. LUBINSKI:

Good evening, everyone.

17 As Alison introduced me, earlier, I'm the Director of18 the Division of License Renewal at NRC Headquarters.

19 And I wanted to start by thanking everyone20 for being here tonight.

I appreciate it, I know how21 valuable everyone's time is. You being here tonight22 shows me how important this issue is to you.23 And I want you to know that we appreciate 24 the fact that you took the time. We also appreciate 25 the fact that many of you have provided writtenNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 771 comments, plan to provide written comments.

2 We look forward to reviewing those3 comments.

As Elaine Keegan said, earlier, and was4 repeated later in response to some questions, we are5 looking if there is any new information related to the6 DSEIS that was issued.7 This is only our preliminary document at8 this point, it is a draft. We have not made any final9 conclusions.

And we are looking, if there is new10 information, if you believe there are factual11 inaccuracies, if you believe there is errors, if you12 have new information for us, we do want that13 information.

14 That is the purpose of having a public15 comment period, that is the purpose of having this16 meeting, to obtain that new information.

17 We will evaluate those comments, and18 determine how they are to be addressed and if further19 evaluation is needed.20 If further evaluation is needed, based on21 those comments, we will do that further evaluation, and22 document those results.

And in our document we will23 also put the comments and how we addressed those, and24 how they were addressed in the document.

25 I heard a lot of discussion,

tonight, aboutNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 781 alternatives.

And we do want to get input with respect2 to the alternatives that are in the document.

3 As Elaine said, earlier, the reason we are4 looking at the alternatives, and the reason we are5 looking at the environmental impact, is to determine 6 whether or not the impacts on the environment are too7 great to renew the license.8 People have a lot of opinions about what9 should be done as far as energy. We are not in the10 energy policy business, we are in the safety business.

II And we are looking for the impacts of what12 the impacts would be, from a nuclear plant, on the13 environment.

We won't be making any conclusions about14 whether one alternative is better than another.15 That is not part of our policy, that is16 other policymakers, that is other lawmakers, that is17 other decision makers in the energy area.18 But we will take into account, in making19 those evaluations of those alternatives, the comments20 that you provided tonight.21 A couple of other issues that I heard come22 up tonight, were a lot about the waste, and the Waste23 Confidence, and the Waste Confidence rulemaking.

24 And I just wanted to clarify that tonight' s25 meeting was on the site-specific supplement to theNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 791 Environmental Impact Statement, the draft document we2 issued, which Elaine said earlier, does not address the3 Waste Confidence issue.4 That is being taken care of as part of the5 Waste Confidence rulemaking that the NRC has6 undertaken.

So those comments, we will document7 those, we will document them in our comment section,8 but the resolution of any comments, related to Waste9 Confidence will be part of that rulemaking.

10 And that comment period was open -- I'm11 sorry? It was open last fall, and our staff is12 reviewing those comments.

13 And the last point I want to make, there14 were issues brought up about the safety of the plant.15 And as part of -- I 'm going to talk about license renewal16 in general.17 Because the purpose of this meeting was the18 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement.

But as19 part of license renewal we also do a Safety Review.20 Elaine touched on that earlier, on the21 process, the way it works and the two-pronged approach.

22 We do look at the impacts of aging, on the nuclear23 powers, as part of our decision of whether to renew a24 license, look at how that is managed, look at how it25 is evaluated.

NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 801 If there are safety issues that occur,2 during plant operation, we do not wait until license3 renewal to address those. They are handled earlier.45 I heard comments about the shield6 building, the comments about flooding.

Those are7 being handled, today, outside of license renewal and8 independent of the decision whether to renew the9 license.10 If those, if the resolution of those issues11 results in changes to an aging management

program, with12 respect to the plant, we will address those.13 But we will not wait. As part of14 activities

already, licensees, including Davis-Besse 15 are addressing flood issues at the plants, including 16 walk-downs of the plants in response to the lessons17 learned from the Fukushima incident that was mentioned 18 earlier.19 As well as a submittal of a re-evaluation 20 of flooding and seismic issues at all the plants. And21 they are being handled separately.

22 So whether or not a plant were to seek23 license renewal, obtain license renewal, those issues24 will still be addressed.

Same with the safety issues25 introduced

earlier, where Jamnes Cameron, and DavidNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 811 Hills, who are responsible in Region III, Branch Chiefs2 for safety inspections at the plants, and resolution 3 of those issues.4 And if there are any safety issues, at the5 plant, they will make sure that they are resolved, by6 the licensee, prior to any restart.78 So I would like to conclude my remarks, and9 I'm getting ready to turn it over to Brian, again, with10 thanking everyone for being here tonight.

As I said,11 I think it is an important part of the process.12 If there is new information that you have13 presented

tonight, or if you have new information, as14 you continue to look at the document, please submit that15 to us and we will evaluate that information, before16 making any final decisions with the Environmental 17 Impact Statement that was issued as a draft.18 So with that I would like to turn to Brian19 Wittack, for some closing remarks.20 MR. WITTACK:

Thank you, John. And I21 would like to echo John's remarks thanking everyone for22 coming out tonight and spending your valuable time to23 attend this public meeting.24 This is a very important part of our25 licensing process.

This is the second public meetingNEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 821 in the Davis-Besse license renewal process, evaluating 2 the Environmental Impact Statement.

3 The first was associated with the scoping,4 this second and final meeting is the final opportunity 5 to provide your insights, and comments, and we heard6 a lot of good inputs this evening.7 And we hope that everyone will take the8 opportunity to submit any additional comments that you9 see as appropriate.

The comment period closes on April10 21st.II The contact information is via12 regulations.gov and as I mentioned I hope everyone13 takes the opportunity to submit those comments.

14 Lastly, following this meeting, the NRC15 representatives will be available for some additional 16 discussion.

If anyone cares to stay around and has any17 additional questions of the technical safety18 representatives from the region, as well as the19 representatives from headquarters.

20 With that I would like to conclude the21 meeting, and the meeting is adjourned.

22 (Whereupon, at 8:52 p.m., the23 above-entitled matter was concluded.)

2425NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 831234567NEAL R. GROSSCOURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433