ML053400361
| ML053400361 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 11/01/2005 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Rani Franovich NRC/NRR/ADRO/DLR/REBB |
| Keto E, NRR/DLR/REBB, 415-2621 | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML053400397 | List: |
| References | |
| %dam200604, NRC-691, TAC MC7625 | |
| Download: ML053400361 (141) | |
Text
Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Title:
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Plant Public Meeting: Afternoon Session Docket Number:
50-219 Location:
Toms River, New Jersey Date:
Tuesday, November 1, 2005 Work Order No.:
NRC-691 Pages 1-138 NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC.
Court Reporters and Transcribers 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 234-4433
1 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 1
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
+ + + + +
3 PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING 4
FOR OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT, 5
AFTERNOON SESSION 7
+ + + + +
8
- TUESDAY, 9
NOVEMBER 1, 2005 10
+ + + + +
11 TOMS RIVER, NEW JERSEY 12
+ + + + +
13 The afternoon session of the Public 14 Meeting was convened at the Quality Inn at 815 Route 15 37 in Toms River, New Jersey, at 1:30 p.m, and the 16 evening session convened at 7:00 p.m., F. "Chip" 17 Cameron, Facilitator, presiding.
18 NRC STAFF PARTICIPATING:
19 F. "CHIP" CAMERON 20 RANI FRANOVICH 21 MICHAEL MASNIK 22 RON BELLAMY 23 24 25
2 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 NRC STAFF PARTICIPATING: (cont'd) 1 ALAN MADISON 2
4 SPEAKERS:
5 TOM JACKSON 6
MIKE MERCURIO 7
ED FRYDENDAHL 8
DON WARREN 9
J. SIMONAIR 10 ED STROUP 11 BUD SWENSON 12 FRED POLASKI 13 TOM CERVASIO 14 WAYNE ROMBERG 15 JUDITH CAMBRIA 16 BUD THOMAN 17 CHIP GERRITY 18 DON WILLIAMS 19 NANCY ERIKSEN 20 PAULA GOTSCH 21 SUZANNE LETA 22 KELLY McNICHOLAS 23 CHRIS TRYON 24 JAY VOUGLITOIS 25
3 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 SPEAKERS: (cont'd) 1 TERRY MATTHEWS 2
ROBERTO WEINMANN 3
ED HOGAN, father 4
ED HOGAN, son 5
ROD STERLING 6
DAVID MOST 7
PEGGI STURMFELS 8
JEFFREY BROWN 9
JENNIFER M. WATLEY 10 RON WATSON 11 DONALD POSEY 12 JUDY MOKEN 13 DIANE ELENESKI 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
4 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 A-G-E-N-D-A 1
Session I:
PAGE 2
Welcome and Purpose of Meeting 5
3 Overview of License Renewal Process 10 4
Overview of Environmental Review Process 18 5
Public Comment 60 6
Closing/Availability of Transcripts, etc.
131 7
Adjourn 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
5 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 1
(1:29 p.m.)
2 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Good afternoon, 3
everyone. My name is Chip Cameron. I'm the Special 4
Counsel for Public Liaison at the Nuclear Regulatory 5
Commission, and it's my pleasure to serve as your 6
facilitator for today's meeting.
7 And our subject today is the NRC review 8
and evaluation process for an application that we 9
received from AmerGen Corporation to renew the 10 operating license for the Oyster Creek nuclear 11 facility. And that's what we're here to talk to you 12 about today, specifically our environmental review 13 process, but not only to answer questions on the 14 process but also to take the opportunity to listen to 15 your concerns, comments, recommendations, about the 16 license renewal process, and specifically about what 17 we should consider when we do the environmental 18 review.
19 My job as facilitator is to try to help 20 all of you have a productive meeting today, and I just 21 want to talk for a few minutes about meeting process 22 issues before we get on to the substance of our 23 discussions. I'd like to give you an idea of the 24 format we're using, talk a little bit about some 25
6 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 simple ground rules that will help us all to have a 1
good meeting, and to introduce the NRC staff who will 2
be talking to you today.
3 In terms of format, we're going to do the 4
meeting in two parts, and basically that matches up 5
with our objectives of giving you information and 6
listening to you. In the first part of the meeting, 7
we're going to have two brief NRC presentations, and 8
then we're going to go out to you for questions to 9
make sure that we have really given you a clear idea 10 of what our process looks at when we evaluate one of 11 these applications.
12 After that we're going to go to the part 13 of the meeting where we listen to you, and we'll give 14 you an opportunity to come up to the podium here to 15 talk to us. Or if you don't want to come to the 16 podium, I can bring you this cordless microphone.
17 We are taking written comments on the 18 issues, and please feel free to submit written 19 comments. But we wanted to be here with you this 20 afternoon to talk to you personally, and I just want 21 to emphasize that anything we hear today will carry as 22 much weight as a written comment.
23 In terms of ground rules, they are simple.
24 When we get to the question period, if you have a 25
7 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 question, just signal me and I'll bring you this 1
cordless mike. Please introduce yourself to us, and 2
ask your question. And I know it's hard not to wrap 3
a comment up in a question, and that's fine, but try 4
to keep that part of the meeting to questions, and we 5
will be going to the comment part of the meeting later 6
on.
7 I would ask that only one person at a time 8
speak for two important reasons, the most important 9
being that we can give whomever has the floor our full 10 attention.
The second reason is that our 11 stenographer/court reporter over here, Mr. Doug 12 Turner, I believe, can get a clear transcript. In 13 other words, he'll know who is speaking at the time.
14 I would ask all of us to extend courtesy 15 to different opinions that we might hear today. We 16 usually hear different opinions, some strongly held, 17 about license renewal applications, and I would just 18 ask you to just respect one another's opinions.
19 In terms of the time element, I would also 20 ask you both during questions and your comments to try 21 to be succinct, so that we can make sure that we give 22 everybody an opportunity to talk today. And we 23 usually set a five-minute guideline in terms of formal 24 comment. We don't have a whole lot of speakers today, 25
8 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 so if you could just try to keep it in the five-to 1
seven-minute range.
2 Usually, we find that five minutes is 3
enough to summarize the major points that you have.
4 And it does two things, two important things for us.
5 One is it alerts us to issues of concern that the 6
public has that we can start working on right away 7
before we see any written comments, and, in fact, that 8
the staff and our experts can come and talk to you 9
about after the meeting. Second important function is 10 that it gives others in the community, others in the 11 audience, an idea of what the concerns are that people 12 might have.
13 So I would thank all of you for being here 14 with us this afternoon, and the NRC staff will be here 15 after the meeting to talk to you informally about 16 whatever issues you might have.
17 Let me introduce our speakers. First 18 speaker is Rani Franovich, who is right over here, and 19 she is the Chief of the Environmental Branch within 20 our License Renewal and Environmental Review Program 21 at the NRC. And that's in our Office of Nuclear 22 Reactor Regulation.
23 Rani and her staff are responsible for 24 preparing the environmental reviews not only -- well, 25
9 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 basically on license renewal applications, but there 1
may be other things, but basically license renewal 2
applications. To give you an idea of her background, 3
she has been with the agency for about 15 years.
4 Eight of those years were in our Region II office down 5
in Atlanta, and Rani served as a resident inspector.
6 These are the NRC staff who actually are 7
onsite at all operating nuclear reactors to make sure 8
that our regulations are being followed by the 9
licensee. And she was resident inspector at Catawba.
10 She was also the project manager for the safety review 11 of license renewal applications at both Catawba and 12 the McGuire plants.
13 She was also the enforcement coordinator 14 within our Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, and 15 now she is Chief of the Environmental Branch.
16 Bachelor's Degree in Psychology from 17 Virginia Tech, and a Master's in Industrial Systems 18 Engineering, also from Virginia Tech. So she's going 19 to give you a welcome, a short overview of license 20 renewal, and then we're going to go to Mr. Mike Masnik 21
-- Dr. Masnik, who is right here.
22 Mike is the Project Manager for the 23 preparation of the environmental review on this 24 reactor. So he's the one who is responsible for 25
10 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 supervising the other NRC staff that work on this, our 1
contractors. He will be telling you about that. He 2
works for Rani. He's in that branch.
3 And he has a Bachelor's from Cornell, and 4
a Master's and Ph.D.
from Virginia Tech in 5
Ichthyology.
6 Okay. But he has a -- sort of an 7
interesting, a close connection with Oyster Creek that 8
you might be interested in. His parents had a summer 9
house in Seaside Park, and he spent summers here until 10 he went to graduate school. He was a park ranger at 11 the Island Beach State Park, which I take it is close 12 to here, during college. And he has been with the NRC 13 in 1974, and he has worked on several issues related 14 to Oyster Creek since then -- the shipworm issue for 15 one, in the '70s and '80s, and the endangered sea 16 turtles and cold shock fish kills.
17 So he has a long association with the 18 plant, and now he is Project Manager for the 19 environmental review.
20 And with that, I would just ask Rani to 21 welcome all of you. Thank you.
22 MS. FRANOVICH: Thank you, Chip. Can 23 everybody hear me pretty well? Can you guys hear me?
24 SEVERAL PARTICIPANTS: Yes.
25
11 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MS. FRANOVICH: Okay. I wanted to thank 1
you all for coming out today and taking the time from 2
your busy schedules to be here with us. It's an 3
important meeting, an opportunity for us to share some 4
information with you that I hope will help you 5
understand the process that we'll be going through for 6
license renewal on Oyster Creek, and the role you can 7
help -- or play in helping to make sure that the 8
environmental impact statement we prepare for this 9
license renewal review is accurate.
10 I'd like to start off by briefly going 11 over again the purposes of today's meeting. We'll 12 explain the NRC's license renewal process for nuclear 13 powerplants, with emphasis on the environmental review 14 process. And we'll talk a little bit about the areas 15 that we look at for that environmental review.
16 We'll also share with you the license 17 renewal review schedule. And, really, the most 18 important thing that we're going to do today is 19 receive any comments you may have on the scope of our 20 review. We'll also give you some information about 21 how you can submit comments outside of this meeting in 22 writing.
23 Next slide, Mike.
24 Before I describe the license renewal 25
12 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 process, I'd like to provide some general information, 1
just to give you a context of our review. The Atomic 2
Energy Act gives the NRC the authority to issue 3
operating licenses to commercial nuclear powerplants 4
for a period of 40 years. With Oyster Creek nuclear 5
generating station, that license will expire in 2009.
6 Our regulations also provide for extending 7
those operating licenses for an additional 20 years, 8
or actually what we'll do is issue a brand-new license 9
when we approve an application for renewal. And 10 AmerGen has requested license renewal for Oyster 11 Creek.
12 As part of the NRC's review of that 13 license renewal application, we'll perform an 14 environmental review to look at the impacts on the 15 environment of an additional 20 years of operation.
16 The purpose of this meeting is to give you information 17 about that process and to seek your input on what 18 issues we should consider within the scope of our 19 review.
20 At the conclusion of the staff's 21 presentation, we'll be happy to answer any questions 22 you may have and receive any comments you wish to --
23 you may wish to share with us on the process and the 24 scope.
25
13 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 We have several members of the NRC staff 1
here, as Mr. Cameron indicated a few minutes ago, that 2
can talk with you one on one if you still have some 3
questions you'd like to discuss with us after the 4
meeting.
5 Next slide, Mike.
6 Before I get into a discussion of license 7
renewal, I'd like to take a minute and talk about the 8
NRC in terms of what we do and what our mission is.
9 The Atomic Energy Act also is the legislation that 10 authorizes the NRC to regulate the civilian use of 11 nuclear materials in this country.
12 In carrying out that authority, the NRC's 13 mission is threefold -- to ensure adequate protection 14 of public health and safety, to protect the 15 environment, and to provide for the common defense and 16 security. The NRC accomplishes its mission through a 17 combination of regulatory programs and processes such 18 as inspections, enforcement actions, assessment of 19 licensee performance, and evaluation of operating 20 experience from nuclear plants across this country and 21 internationally.
22 Turning now to license renewal in 23 particular, the NRC's license renewal review is 24 similar to the original licensing process in that it 25
14 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 involves two parts. It involves two parts -- an 1
environmental review and a safety review. In 2
addition, as part of the safety review, the staff 3
carries out inspections and audits.
4 The results of the review are presented to 5
the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, or ACRS.
6 The ACRS is a group of nationally-recognized technical 7
experts in nuclear safety who serve as a consulting 8
body to the Commission. They review each license 9
renewal application, as well as the safety evaluation 10 report prepared by the staff. They form their own 11 conclusions and recommendations, and they report those 12 directly to the Commission.
13 This slide gives a big picture overview of 14 the license renewal process. You'll see the safety 15 review represented up here on
- top, and the 16 environmental review represented down here on the 17 bottom.
18 Next slide, Mike.
19 I'd like to start with the safety review 20 process. You might ask: what does the safety review 21 consider? For license renewal, the safety review 22 considers aging management. However, the NRC also 23 monitors and addresses current operating issues, such 24 as security, emergency planning, safety performance, 25
15 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 and other ongoing operating issues on an ongoing 1
basis.
2 Under the current operating license, the 3
NRC's regulatory oversight process deals with these 4
current operating issues. We don't wait for a plant 5
to come in for license renewal to address them or to 6
require licensees to address those issues as well.
7 Because the NRC is dealing with these 8
current operating issues on a continuing basis, we do 9
not reevaluate them in license renewal. As I said, 10 the safety review focuses specifically on aging 11 management. It involves the NRC staff's review and 12 assessment of safety information that is contained in 13 the license renewal application. There is a team of 14 about 30 NRC technical reviewers and contractors who 15 are conducting the safety review right now.
16 I'd like to introduce Mr. Donnie Ashley.
17 He is the Project Manager for the safety review. Don, 18 if you wouldn't mind standing up. Thank you.
19 The safety review for license renewal 20 focuses on how AmerGen will manage the aging of 21 certain structures, systems, and components, in the 22 period of extended operation. Some of the programs 23 for managing aging are already in place, while others 24 will be implemented as part of the license renewal.
25
16 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 The safety review process also involves 1
audits and plant inspections. These inspections are 2
conducted by a team of inspectors from both 3
headquarters and the NRC's Region I office. With us 4
today from our inspection program is the Senior 5
Resident Inspector at Oyster Creek, Mr. Marc Ferdas.
6 Thank you, Marc.
7 We also have Dr. Ron Bellamy, his boss, 8
from the NRC Region I office in King of Prussia, 9
Pennsylvania. Thank you, Dr. Bellamy.
10 The results of the inspections will be 11 documented in separate inspection reports, and the 12 results of the staff's safety review and audits are 13 documented in the safety evaluation report. After the 14 safety evaluation report is prepared, it will be 15 independently reviewed by the ACRS.
16 Next slide, please, Harriet.
17 The second part of the process involves an 18 environmental review with scoping activities and the 19 development of an environmental impact statement. As 20 I've said, we're here today to receive your comments 21 on the scope of that review.
22 We'll consider any comments on the scope 23 that we receive at this meeting or in any written 24 comments subsequent to this meeting. Then, in June of 25
17 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 next year, we expect to issue a draft environmental 1
impact statement for comment.
2 Next slide, please, Harriet.
3 So as you can see from this slide, putting 4
all of the process back together again, the final 5
Commission decision on whether to approve or deny the 6
application will require a number of inputs -- the 7
safety evaluation report, inspection reports, the 8
final EIS or environmental impact statement, and the 9
letter issued by the ACRS to the Commission that 10 forwards their recommendations.
11 I'd like to point out that the yellow 12 hexagons like this one, they indicate opportunities 13 for public participation. This meeting is an early 14 opportunity for public participation. We'll have 15 another meeting to share with you the results of our 16 draft environmental impact statement. That will be 17 another opportunity for you to comment on our review.
18 And at this time, there is still an 19 opportunity to request a hearing through November 14, 20 2005. Also, the ACRS meetings are open to the public.
21 Now, I'd like to turn the presentation 22 over to Dr. Michael Masnik, the environmental project 23 manager, to discuss the environmental review in more 24 detail.
25
18 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Thanks, Rani. We'll 1
go to questions after Mike is done.
2 DR. MASNIK: Thank you, Rani. My name is 3
Michael Masnik, and I'm the Senior Project Manager on 4
the NRC staff, and responsible for coordinating all of 5
the activities of the NRC staff and the various 6
environmental experts at the national labs in 7
developing an environmental impact statement 8
associated with the license renewal application for 9
the Oyster Creek nuclear generating station.
10 The National Environmental Policy Act of 11 1969 requires that federal agencies follow a
12 systematic approach to evaluating potential 13 environmental impacts associated with certain actions.
14 We're required to consider the impacts of the proposed 15 action, and also any mitigation for those impacts we 16 consider to be significant.
17 We're also required to consider 18 alternatives to the proposed action, including the 19 no-action alternative. In other words, if we decide 20 not to approve the requested license renewal, what are 21 the environmental impacts of that decision?
22 The National Environmental Policy Act and 23 our environmental impact statements are disclosure 24 tools. They are specifically structured to involve 25
19 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 public participation, and this meeting facilitates the 1
public participation in our environmental review.
2 The Commission has determined that an 3
environmental impact statement, or EIS, should be 4
prepared for all license renewals. In preparing an 5
environmental impact statement, the NRC conducts a 6
scoping process. The purpose of the scoping process 7
is to identify the significant issues to be analyzed 8
in depth.
9 We are now gathering information for an 10 environmental impact statement and are here to collect 11 public comments on the scope of the review.
12 The staff developed a
generic 13 environmental impact statement, or
- GEIS, that 14 addressed a number of issues that are common to all 15 nuclear powerplants. The staff is supplementing that 16 generic EIS with a site-specific EIS that will address 17 issues that are specific to Oyster Creek. The staff 18 also evaluates the conclusions reached in the GEIS to 19 determine if there is any new and significant 20 information that would change any of these 21 conclusions.
22 As was said earlier by Rani, issues such 23 as emergency preparedness and physical security are 24 not considered within the scope of our license renewal 25
20 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 review. Such issues are evaluated regularly and will 1
continue to be evaluated regularly during the renewal 2
term, if granted.
3 Next slide.
4 This slide shows our decision standard for 5
the environmental review. Simply put, is a license 6
renewal acceptable from an environmental standpoint?
7 Next slide, please.
8 This slide is similar to the slide that 9
Rani had up a few minutes ago. It shows the timeline 10 for the environmental review process, specifically now 11 for Oyster Creek. We received AmerGen's application 12 for the license renewal for the Oyster Creek nuclear 13 station on July 22, 2005.
14 On September 22nd, we issued a Federal 15 Register notice of intent to prepare an environmental 16 impact statement and to conduct scoping. This started 17 a 60-day clock defined as the scoping period, and 18 we're within the scoping period right now. This 19 meeting is part of that scoping process, so that we 20 can get comments from the public to help us scope out 21 the balance of our environmental review.
22 After the end of the scoping period, which 23 will be November 25, 2005, we will issue a scoping 24 summary report that will address all the comments we 25
21 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 receive from all sources during the scoping period.
1 Now, I discovered yesterday that the date 2
for the end of the scoping period on the NRC website 3
schedule for Oyster Creek is in error, and the correct 4
date for the end of the scoping period is November 25, 5
2005. The web address has been corrected, and it was 6
corrected today. In essence, it gives the public an 7
additional 10 days to provide comments to the staff.
8 On October 10th through the 14th, members 9
of the NRC staff and a team of environmental experts 10 from Argonne National Lab and Pacific Northwest 11 National Lab conducted the environmental site audit to 12 help gather information on the scoping process. And 13 if you'll remember, that was during the northeasterner 14 we had here and the team got pretty wet spending a 15 week outside on Barnegat Bay.
16 If in the conduct of our review we require 17 additional information beyond what was already 18 provided to us in the application, we will issue a 19 request for additional information. And we plan to 20 issue that request for additional information by 21 December 16, 2005, if it's needed.
22 And approximately eight weeks later we 23 expect to get an answer back from AmerGen, and then, 24 based on the information we have in hand, we will 25
22 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 prepare and publish a draft environmental impact 1
statement, and we'll issue that draft environmental 2
impact statement for public comment.
3 We envision publishing the draft EIS in 4
June of 2006, and when the draft is published we'll 5
have a 75-day public comment period. We have some 6
examples of environmental impact statements on -- from 7
previous license renewal on the back table there, and 8
this is what they look like.
9 We plan to have another public meeting 10 here in July 2006 to receive the comments on the draft 11 EIS. Once we receive comments on the draft EIS, we 12 will develop a final EIS, which we expect to publish 13 in January of 2007.
14 Next slide, please.
15 This slide shows some of the sources where 16 we gather our information. In addition to our site 17 audit, we communicate with Federal, State, and local 18 officials, as well as local service agencies. For 19 example, for the Oyster Creek review, we've already 20 met with representatives of the State Historic 21 Preservation Office, the New Jersey Department of 22 Environmental Protection, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 23 Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, the U.S.
24 Geological Service, and other organizations.
25
23 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 We've also met with local officials from 1
Lacey Township and Ocean County. And we consider all 2
of the comments we will receive from the public.
3 Next slide.
4 For the review, we've established a team 5
made up of members of the NRC staff, supplemented by 6
experts -- uh-oh. What happened? Supplemented by 7
experts in various fields from Argonne National Lab 8
and the Pacific Northwest National Lab.
9 If you have the handout, you can follow 10 along, and we've reprinted all of the slides. We're 11 on slide 13.
12 The slide gives an idea of the examples of 13 the areas in which the experts evaluate. Some of the 14 areas are terrestrial and aquatic
- ecology, 15 archaeology, socioeconomics, radiation protection, to 16 name a few.
17 Let's just pause here for a second and --
18 how long is it going to take, Bob?
19 (Pause.)
20 Slide 14. Okay. Next slide.
21 This slide just recaps a couple of the key 22 milestone dates in our schedule. As mentioned, we are 23 currently in the scoping comment period, which ends 24 November 25th. All comments, whether in the form of 25
24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 a letter or an e-mail, as well as comments received 1
from the transcribed public
- meeting, will be 2
considered.
3 We will be publishing an Oyster Creek 4
site-specific supplement to the generic EIS. It's 5
also called a supplemental environmental EIS, or SEIS 6
for short. That supplement will be published and made 7
available in June 2006. It'll have a 75-day comment 8
period, and, after considering your comments on the 9
draft, we'll be publishing the final form in January 10 of 2007.
11 There's one more date that I would hope 12 you would remember. It's not on this list, but the 13 deadline for requesting a hearing is November 14, 14 2005.
15 Next slide, please.
16 This slide identifies me as your primary 17 point of contact with the NRC for the preparation of 18 this environmental impact statement. It also 19 identifies where documents related to our review may 20 be found in the local area. The Lacey public library 21 has agreed to make license renewal -- the license 22 renewal application available for public review in 23 addition to any correspondence the NRC has to AmerGen 24 or vice versa.
25
25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 The draft environmental impact statement 1
will also be available at the Lacey library when it is 2
published. And all documents are or will be available 3
on the NRC's website, which is www.nrc.gov.
4 In addition, as you came in you were asked 5
to fill out a registration card at our reception 6
table. If you've included your address on the card, 7
we will mail you a copy of the draft and final EIS.
8 If you did not fill out a card and want a copy of the 9
draft and final impact statement for Oyster Creek, 10 please see Harriet -- Harriet? Right here after the 11 meeting, and she'll sign you up.
12 Next slide.
13 Now, in addition to providing comments at 14 the meeting, there are other ways that you can submit 15 comments for an environmental review process. You can 16 provide written comments to the Chief of our Rules and 17 Directives Branch at the address on the screen. You 18 can also make comments in person, if you happen to be 19 in Rockville, Maryland.
20 We've established a specific e-mail 21 address at the NRC for the purpose of receiving your 22 comments on the development of our environmental 23 impact statement and what you think the scope of the 24 review should be. And that e-mail address is 25
26 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 oystercreekeis@nrc.gov. All of your comments will be 1
collected and considered.
2 And this concludes my remarks, and thank 3
you again for taking the time to attend this meeting.
4 At this time, I'll turn it back over to 5
Chip.
6 (Applause.)
7 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thank you.
8 DR. MASNIK: Thank you.
9 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Thank you, Mike.
10 Now is an opportunity to thank Mike and Rani for 11 boiling down a complicated process into hopefully 12 something that was simple to understand for you. But 13 are there questions about the process, what the NRC 14 looks at, anything to do with license renewal?
15 Anybody have a question?
16 Yes, sir, and if you could just introduce 17 yourself to us, please.
18 MR. JACKSON: My name is Tom Jackson.
19 (Inaudible comment from an unmiked location.)
20 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Thank you, Mr.
21 Jackson.
22 Mike, do you want to try to talk about is 23 the -- the license renewal period set in our 24 regulations, is it set by statute, because that's --
25
27 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 that goes to the point of how that could be changed?
1 DR. MASNIK: It's a good question. When 2
the NRC was writing the regulations for license 3
renewal, we tried to consider what would be a 4
reasonable renewal period. And our regulations state 5
20 years as the maximum amount of time that a licensee 6
can request a renewal term.
7 In fact, a licensee could request a 8
shorter period of time if they chose to. The 9
regulations -- well, the reason why we picked 20 years 10 was the fact that the normal license is 40 years, and 11 that 20 years seems to be a reasonable compromise.
12 And if you look at the degradation of components and 13 other systems within the plant, that was probably a 14 reasonable amount of time for renewal of the license.
15 So it was a combination of the fact that 16 our current licenses are granted for a 20-year -- I 17 mean, for a 40-year period. In other words, if you 18 came in and requested a new plant license, we would 19 grant a license up to 40 years.
20 To change that, what you need to do is 21 request -- there is a process within our regulations 22 for members of the public to request a change in the 23 regulations. I don't know the actual section of the 24 regulations, but we certainly have the regulations 25
28 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 here tonight, and we can -- we can get with you 1
afterwards and tell you which portion of the 2
regulations to look in to see the process for filing 3
a request to change the rules.
4 FACILITATOR CAMERON: And that's called a 5
petition for rulemaking, and it's set forth -- how you 6
do that is set forth in 2.802 of our regulations. We 7
can give you some more information about that. That 8
request goes into the NRC November 3rd -- changing the 9
regulations.
10 But as he says, the first step -- Mr.
11 Jackson, it seems like what you're suggesting is a 12 good -- should be a shorter period of time. Is that 13 correct?
14 MR. JACKSON: (Inaudible comment from an 15 unmiked location.)
16 FACILITATOR CAMERON: 2.802, petition for 17 rulemaking, is in -- all government regulations, 18 federal agency regulations, are in these books that 19 are called Code of Federal Regulations. And the NRC's 20 regulations are in Title 10 of that. And so when we 21 talk governmentese, I guess, we say 10 CFR Part 2, 22 2.802. What that means is Title 10 of the Code of 23 Federal Regulations, Part 2 of Title 10, and 24 specifically.802, petition for rulemaking.
25
29 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 And for Mr. Jackson and anybody else who 1
wants to know more about this, we can explain that 2
either here today, or meet with you afterwards to 3
discuss that. Okay?
4 Thank you, Mr. Jackson.
5 Other questions? Yes, sir.
6 UNIDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: (Inaudible 7
comment from an unmiked location.)
8 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thank you.
9 DR. MASNIK: I think you're referring to 10 the spent nuclear fuel after it's taken out of the 11 reactor. That fuel is stored onsite. A portion of it 12 is stored in a spent fuel pool underwater, and a 13 portion now is stored in dry storage in dry storage 14 casks onsite.
15 The ultimate plan is to have that spent 16 nuclear fuel shipped to a
permanent geologic 17 repository, and currently the government is 18 investigating as to whether or not the Yucca Mountain 19 site is an appropriate place to put that fuel.
20 We understand that in the near future, the 21 NRC will be involved in reviewing an application by 22 the Department of Energy for licensing the Yucca 23 Mountain facility, so that that spent fuel can be 24 shipped to that facility and permanently disposed of 25
30 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 in a geologic repository.
1 FACILITATOR CAMERON: And, Mike, I know we 2
don't -- we don't know when the -- or if the geologic 3
repository is going to -- whether there's going to be 4
a license application, how long it will take us to --
5 whether it will be approved.
6 But could you give this gentleman an idea 7
of -- forgetting about Yucca Mountain -- how long do 8
we authorize spent fuel to be left onsite under our 9
regulations? In other words, just to give you -- I 10 think he wants an idea of the timeframe.
11 DR. MASNIK: Oh. The fuel is stored 12 onsite, and the licensee is required during that 13 storage period to have a license. The license 14 requires certain surveillance requirements and certain 15 protective measures taken to protect it from the 16 public. As long as that fuel is onsite, it will be 17 guarded and kept in a safe, stable condition.
18 FACILITATOR CAMERON: So, basically, we're 19 talking indefinitely?
20 DR. MASNIK: Well, indefinitely until 21 there is a repository or some other facility to take 22 the fuel.
23 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay.
24 UNIDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: (Inaudible 25
31 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 comment from an unmiked location.)
1 FACILITATOR CAMERON: We've got to get you 2
on a mike.
3 UNIDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: How can they 4
use Yucca Mountain when Nevada doesn't want those --
5 if they don't want --
6 MR. MASNIK: Well, it's been a long time 7
that the Department of Energy has been working on 8
Yucca Mountain, it's true. And the State of Nevada 9
has expressed some concern about the transport of them 10 there. But the fact is that the fuel has to be stored 11 somewhere, and right now it's being stored at the 12 site.
13 There is another alternative that's being 14 looked into, too, and that's -- it's called private 15 fuel storage. It's an above-ground interim storage 16 facility out west as well, where the fuel would be 17 stored for an indefinite period of time, again until 18 a geologic repository is available.
19 FACILITATOR CAMERON: And I think that 20 some of the Nevada objections might use the term 21 "store," which is -- as opposed to "dispose." At the 22 Yucca Mountain site I think some of the Nevada 23 objections are to bring all of the -- to bringing all 24 of the spent fuel from all over the country and 25
32 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 disposing of it.
1 UNIDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: (Inaudible 2
comment from an unmiked location.)
3 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Mike, I know it's 4
hard to comment about cause and effect. But in terms 5
of like radiation release from the spent fuel storage, 6
can you just talk to our regulations, how we regulate 7
releases from that?
8 DR. MASNIK: Yes. First of all, I'd like 9
to say that the fuel is stored in a safe, stable 10 configuration that doesn't result in significant 11 releases of radioactivity to the environment.
12 The fuel that's in dry storage is in 13 sealed containers, and it's at a distance far enough 14 away from, you know, people that it doesn't pose any 15 danger as far as health condition. Nuclear 16 powerplants, over the last 30 years, have dramatically 17 reduced the amount of radiation that they are 18 releasing to the environment, and Oyster Creek is no 19 exception.
20 And it's highly unlikely, and I certainly 21 can talk to you afterwards, that there's any cause and 22 effect here as far as low level radiation and the 23 incidence of cancer in the community.
24 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thanks, Mike.
25
33 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 And we're going to go to some people back here. And 1
if you could just I guess speak closer to the mike.
2 We're having trouble back here. And we're going to go 3
to this lady now.
4 UNIDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: I'd like to 5
know how many spent fuel rods are now stored onsite, 6
and how many are we generating in a yearly process?
7 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thank you.
8 Mike do we have that?
9 DR. MASNIK: That's a number I don't know.
10 I don't know if there's anyone else here -- is there 11 anybody from the licensee that can give a ball park 12 number?
13 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Is there anybody --
14 what we'll do is let me ask -- I know that Pete 15 Ressler is here. I hope I'm pronouncing that 16 correctly. Could you respond to her later on this 17 specific -- do you know this right off?
18 PMR. RESSLER: I don't know that right 19 offhand.
20 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. He'll get 21 with you. And if we -- we'll get that -- we'll get 22 that number for you. Okay? Before the end of this 23 meeting, we'll find out.
24 UNIDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: That would be 25
34 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 nice.
1 FACILITATOR CAMERON: the people that do 2
evaluate the licensing of that storage system do --
3 for us do know those answers. They're just not here 4
right now with us, but we will -- we will find out.
5 Okay?
6 Yes, sir.
7 MR. MERCURIO: Mike Mercurio. I represent 8
St. Francis Environmental Ministry. I'm also a 9
developer.
10 This state does need nuclear power, but 11 there is a big "but" attached to that. Is the same --
12 demonstrated the amount of natural gas, power, and 13 electric is being used up at a faster rate because we 14 don't have enough, but we can build clean renewable 15 energy.
16 A major statement is plants such as Oyster 17 Creek is -- is there any precedent for renewal 18 applications on any nuclear plant that's almost 40 19 years old? And why is it just -- I'm agreeing with 20 the gentleman with the Senator's office -- why it has 21 to be 20 years? Most nuclear plant errors occur 22 because of human faults, not just safety features and 23 environmental features.
24 The point being is I am for renewing it, 25
35 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 but on a five-year basis, not a 20-year. Everything 1
has its life cycle. You have computers today that are 2
disposable. Things that were built a long time ago, 3
bridges can be found to be unsafe. Many things that 4
man builds deteriorate, and everything has its life 5
expectancy and it can only be estimates. the point 6
being is I think this should be taken in five-year 7
increments.
8 The second question is: what are the 9
requirements of nuclear regulatory as far as encasing 10 the spent fuel rods? Are there specific things at 11 Yucca Mountain that they are required to do, which is 12 we can't -- and I understand a lot of the points of 13 spent fuel rods is not in -- is the transportation of 14 those to Yucca Mountain.
15 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thank you.
16 We have two questions. One, are there 17 other plants that -- of this age that have come in for 18 renewal? And, secondly, what happens to the spent 19 fuel rods in terms of transport and disposal at Yucca 20 Mountain?
21 MR. MERCURIO: What are the regulations 22 for encasement?
23 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. And, Rani, I 24 know you can answer the first one. And we'll try to 25
36 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 work on the second one for you.
1 MS. FRANOVICH: And I know this mike 2
doesn't work very well, so I'll try to project so 3
everybody can hear me. When nuclear powerplants were 4
first built, they were licensed for a period of 40 5
years, not based on concerns with the age of the 6
plant. The 40-year term was based on economic and 7
antitrust considerations.
8 Okay. When the renewal rule acknowledged 9
and allowed for renewal for a period of 20 years, the 10 reason is that this is a significant economic 11 investment by the company for a turnaround, a return, 12 and five years is just not a sufficient period of time 13 to warrant the economic investment.
14 Something worth noting is that a nuclear 15 powerplant can come in for renewal for 20 years, and 16 then come in for renewal for another 20 years. There 17 is nothing that would prohibit them from doing that.
18 But as far as the aging of the plant, the license 19 renewal rule provides for aging management -- the 20 concern that you mentioned about the plant aging.
21 Systems, structures, and components that 22 are important to safety will be managed and monitored 23 by the licensee as required by the NRC to ensure that 24 that aging does not result in failure of the component 25
37 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 to perform its intended safety function. That's what 1
the license renewal provides -- the license renewal 2
rule provides for.
3 Does that answer your question?
4 MR. MERCURIO: Yes and no. But only 5
because -- I know there's age management. I know 6
there's a certain amount of age management, and I 7
understand there's certain economics in building a 8
structure and refurbishment.
9 I think the figure was somewhere around 10
$885 million to refurbish Oyster Creek, to bring it up 11 to environmental standards -- the figure that was 12 published in the newspaper.
13 MS. FRANOVICH: I'm not familiar with 14 that. I don't know. You may be right.
15 MR. MERCURIO: For it to be refurbished to 16 meet certain environmental -- so that it doesn't 17 discharge in the water. And other maintenance factors 18 were involved in it.
19 That points out to the cost, when you 20 build a power generation facility, the same amount and 21 the same accuracy --
22 MS. FRANOVICH: Part of our environmental 23 review considers alternatives to replace that flow.
24 The thing that we usually see is that those 25
38 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 alternative forms of energy can't produce the same 1
number of megawatts as a nuclear powerplant, but we 2
will be considering alternatives in the course of our 3
review.
4 MR. MERCURIO: Look at the new DOE --
5 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. We need to 6
get all the comments on the record here, and we still 7
don't know -- we still don't have an answer on the 8
second question. And we need to know -- I don't think 9
we have -- Mike, do you -- can you just speak 10 generally to how -- what happens to the spent fuel 11 before it's going to be put into a repository? Then 12 we can go to this gentleman right here.
13 DR. MASNIK: Yes. The spent fuel --
14 currently, when it's moved into dry storage, it's 15 placed in a sealed container that's actually welded 16 shut, and it's hermetically sealed. And it's a dual-17 use canister, which allows it to be transported in 18 that canister, so the spent fuel doesn't have to be 19 unloaded before it's actually transported someplace.
20 And to be honest with you, spent fuel is 21 transported across the roadways and railways of this 22 country on a daily basis. Almost every day there is 23 some fuel movement, so the country has a long history 24 of moving fuel safely.
25
39 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 As far as regulations related to Yucca 1
Mountain, I really can't speak to that, because I'm a 2
bit out of my area, and I don't know if there's anyone 3
here that can. But certainly, prior to the NRC 4
licensing that facility, there will be requirements 5
placed on the operator, which is the Department of 6
Energy, so that the fuel is safely stored or safely 7
disposed of in this repository.
8 FACILITATOR CAMERON: And I think we have 9
your address. Let's make a point to send Mr. Mercurio 10 a description about what does happen to spent fuel.
11 We're going to move on to other people.
12 Yes, I think we have this gentleman, and then we're 13 going to go back in the back. Yes, sir.
14 MR.
FRYDENDAHL:
Good afternoon.
15 Frydendahl, Manchester
- Township, Ocean
- County, 16 formerly a 32-year resident of Lacey County.
17 One thing that concerns me with the 18 numbers that are being thrown around -- that a nuclear 19 powerplant has a 40-year given life prior to coming 20 before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to get 21 permission -- be approved for a 40-year life.
22 Renewal is more accurately, it seems, a 23 20-year. As this gentleman brought up, Senator 24 Connors in the 9th Legislative District, which we're 25
40 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 hearing also is -- it suggest five years.
1 Now, it seems to me -- and I think a lot 2
of people in this room would agree with me -- that a 3
Senator of a legislative district would have a lot 4
more clout with getting you people to listen than just 5
any Tom, Dick, and Harry like myself requesting that 6
request.
7 Am I correct in stating that?
8 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Well, I --
9 MS. FRANOVICH: I think we described the 10 process that will be used to petition the staff for 11 rulemaking. So I'm not sure what your question is --
12 that we acknowledge the authority of the Senator.
13 Sure we do. But we have a process to go through, if 14 someone believes we need to change a rule or write a 15 new rule, and that was the process that Chip Cameron 16 directed the gentleman to in the CFR.
17 MR. FRYDENDAHL: Yes. But, Rani, we saw 18 on the slides that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 19 wants our comments, wants to make things safer and 20 make things better. Are they listening to Senator 21 Connors' request?
22 MS. FRANOVICH: Well, I think we're 23 talking about two different things. The purpose of 24 today's meeting is to solicit comment on our 25
41 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 environmental review. If a member of the public 1
wishes to suggest that we change a rule, that's 2
outside the scope of this meeting. That is the 3
petition for rulemaking process. Does that answer 4
your question?
5 MR. FRYDENDAHL: Partially. But the 6
second part of that question is, I don't know how many 7
people are aware of it, but the type of reactor or the 8
type of boiler in Oyster Creek, which is a Part I 9
system, was deemed obsolete by the then Atomic 10 Regulatory Commission about one year after that plant 11 was built.
12 So we're now sitting with a plant that's 13 40 years old, with a reactor or a boiler in there 14 which is deemed obsolete, and now we're asking for 20 15 more years? I don't think so.
16 (Applause.)
17 FACILITATOR CAMERON: I don't know if you 18 want to comment on the statement about obsolete 19 design. I think that it might be important to state 20 that a review was -- the point is that if any member 21 of the public comes in to us with a request to change 22 the regulations, with a rationale for that, we're 23 going to seriously consider that request, whether it 24 comes from you, sir, or whether it comes from Senator 25
42 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Connors. Okay? I just want to make that clear.
1 Anything about the obsolescence of 2
design --
3 MS. FRANOVICH: I'm not familiar with the 4
information that he's referencing. I know nothing 5
about it. But if there's something you can furnish to 6
the staff, please do.
7 MR. FRYDENDAHL: Don't you think that you 8
people should be aware of these things? You're coming 9
to a meeting to bring us information, and you don't 10 have a lot of information.
11 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Sir?
12 MR. FRYDENDAHL: I don't understand this.
13 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Sir, we're going to 14 have to go on with other questions. We're trying to 15 answer your question. Okay? You're making a 16 statement, saying that the design was obsolete.
17 That's not necessarily information that we're going to 18 have for you, or even though, whether that's true, 19 what that means. So we're trying to answer your 20 question.
21 We're going to go back to this gentleman.
22 Please introduce yourself, sir.
23 UNIDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: (Inaudible 24 comment from an unmiked location.)
25
43 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MS. FRANOVICH: I don't think we can hear 1
him.
2 FACILITATOR CAMERON: We can't hear you, 3
sir.
4 UNIDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: (Inaudible 5
comment from an unmiked location.)
6 MS. FRANOVICH: Is there a question? I'm 7
not sure.
8 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. I think he 9
was just trying to give us information. And as I 10 said, we're going to get that information for you on 11 that question. Is there some -- any other questions 12 before we -- we're going to go on, and we're going to 13 go to this gentleman.
14 I want to make sure that we give everybody 15 a chance at a first question before we go on to 16 anybody for a second question. Yes, sir.
17 MR. WARREN: My name is Don Warren. I 18 live in Shingar, which is within the 10-mile limit.
19 I came to the last meeting, and I had a few questions.
20 I actually brought some pictures, which I was told I 21 was not allowed to show because they were too large, 22 so I made sure that the pictures that I brought this 23 time were not too large, because I think when we 24 discuss this it's very important that people are 25
44 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 keeping in very close perspective what exactly we're 1
talking about here.
2 And what we're talking about here is if 3
there is a problem with that plant, and we get a very 4
significant release of radiation, and the consequences 5
of that radiation are Chernobyl children. These are 6
the children of Chernobyl. These are not statistics.
7 These are people's children.
8 If an accident happens at Oyster Creek, 9
these are going to be the children of our community.
10 These are going to be the children of our community 11 for generations to come.
12 I also have another picture here. This is 13 the Davis-Besse reactor that was being inspected 14 regularly by the NRC and by the licensee in Ohio. As 15 anybody can see looking at this picture, severe 16 corrosion is occurring on this. However, they didn't 17 seem to think this was a problem and allowed the plant 18 to continue to operate.
19 This plant is now old at Oyster Creek. So 20 I think you can understand why the community here has 21 quite a few reservations about the inspection that's 22 going on right now at Oyster Creek. With that said, 23 I'd like to go back to the original question that I 24 asked at the first meeting.
25
45 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 And considering how much -- the length of 1
time it's been since then, and nobody has gotten back 2
to me about this question, I would hope that you would 3
have the information to answer this question now, 4
because this is not a question that has come to you 5
out of the blue. This is a question that was asked 6
before, and I was told that I would be given an 7
answer.
8 The question I have is that on March 1st, 9
after restoring the main transformer and restoring the 10 main generator to service at Oyster Creek, a power 11 ascension was in progress when an error resulted in 12 the loss of multiple reactor recirculation pumps, 13 which led an operator to manually scram the reactor.
14 I'd like to add that this was not done very well. It 15 was not controlled well. The water level was not 16 controlled well, and as you go on later in this report 17 that was the conclusion of the NRC inspector.
18 It was also noted that the plant had been 19 overpressurized. And one of the specific questions 20 that I was asking was how many times -- from 21 documentation that I've read, it was overpressurized 22 10 times, the actual reactor vessel. I was asking how 23 many times it had actually been overpressurized, so I 24 was hoping somebody had an answer to that question for 25
46 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 me.
1 And the second question that I had is they 2
put out this report to talk about normal boiler loss 3
of approximately three-quarters of a gallon per 4
minute. Now, my question is: if you've got a reactor 5
that's leaking, and it's considered a normal part of 6
its operation, releasing three-quarters of a gallon 7
per minute, where is this water going? What kind of 8
corrosion is it producing? How is this realistically 9
being monitored?
And not just with visual 10 inspections.
11 As we can see from Davis-Besse, it didn't 12 work, because that reactor was so corroded through it 13 was basically an act of God that kept it from going 14 critical. How is this corrosion being monitored 15 effectively? And not just with visual inspections, 16 but actual testing of materials.
17 And also, where is this water going?
18 Where is this being admitted? Where is this radiation 19 going? I mean, I know it's part of normal operation 20 of a nuclear reactor to be releasing radioactivity 21 into the environment, and I'm concerned that this is 22 not being properly monitored and checked, because --
23 FACILITATOR CAMERON: I'm sorry. Let's 24 try to get some answers to your questions. Thank you.
25
47 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 (Applause.)
1 There seem to be a bunch of questions 2
there. Did you -- can you begin to address them?
3 DR. MASNIK: We'll start.
4 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay.
5 DR.MASNIK: First, the one on Chernobyl, 6
and certainly the Chernobyl accident was a horrific 7
accident. A Chernobyl-type plant cannot be built in 8
this country. It would not have been built. It does 9
not conform to our requirements. And, in fact, a lot 10 of our efforts -- most of our efforts are to prevent 11 that kind of an accident here.
12 Both the inspections that we do, as well 13 as the emergency preparedness exercises that are 14 conducted, are designed to prevent that sort of an 15 event at Oyster Creek, or any nuclear plant in North 16 America.
17 As far as Davis-Besse, the Davis-Besse 18 issue was a big concern. It certainly was a wakeup 19 call for the industry as well as the NRC. We spent a 20 lot of time studying that. We developed a lessons 21 learned task force. We looked at 49 recommendations.
22 We've implemented over 40 of those already. In fact, 23 we've implemented all but one, which is a code change 24 to the ASME code.
25
48 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 So there were a lot of activities that 1
were generated because of the Davis-Besse accident, 2
and the NRC and the industry is confident that such an 3
event of corrosion of the reactor head will not occur 4
again.
5 As far as overpressurization and the 6
normal water loss, I don't know -- Ron, can you talk 7
a little bit about that or --
8 MS. FRANOVICH: Let me give a -- let me 9
say a couple of things real quick first. I think it's 10 important to also remember that Davis-Besse was not an 11 accident. No accident happened at Davis-Besse. There 12 was degradation of the reactor vessel head. We 13 acknowledged that, and, as Mike indicated, that was a 14 wakeup call for the NRC and for the industry.
15 When I gave my presentation, I indicated 16 that we use operating experience, both domestically 17 and internationally, to improve our regulatory 18 process. This is a great example, because now in 19 license renewal, licensees are required to demonstrate 20 certain things that basically reflect recent operating 21 experience -- the cracked nozzles that led to the head 22 degradation from boric acid corrosion being a good 23 example of that.
24 So we integrate that operating experience 25
49 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 into our process to ensure that licensees and 1
applicants for license renewal address these ongoing 2
safety issues.
3 I also wanted to mention that, with 4
respect to what you're reading in the NRC inspection 5
report, that's an example of our continuous process 6
for providing oversight of these operating reactors 7
and looking at ongoing issues and safety performance.
8 So I don't have the details of water leakage.
9 There are inner systems. It could be 10 leaking into another system. It could be leaking into 11
-- it'll definitely be leaking into the containment 12 structure. So wherever it's going is being captured, 13 and there are requirements -- there are tech spec 14 requirements, technical specifications, the licensee 15 must comply with or they're required to shut down.
16 And our resident inspectors who work there 17 40 hours4.62963e-4 days <br />0.0111 hours <br />6.613757e-5 weeks <br />1.522e-5 months <br /> a week are ensuring that they are meeting 18 those requirements. There are a number of specific 19 requirements that deal specifically with reactor 20 coolant system leakage -- leakage from the vessel and 21 the associated reactor coolant system. If they can't 22 maintain processes and operation within those 23 requirements, then they have to take the required 24 action. Sometimes that is to shut down. Sometimes 25
50 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 it's to do other things.
1 So I hope I've addressed that one. I 2
don't know if Dr. Bellamy wants to add anything.
3 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Thanks, Rani. I 4
think that should be helpful. Let's go to Ron, and 5
then we're going to take a couple more questions, 6
including this gentleman, and we're going to on to the 7
comment part of the meeting, so we can make sure we 8
get through that.
9 Ron?
10 DR. BELLAMY: Thanks. Let me try to 11 address a couple of your issues. As memory serves, we 12 believe that your number of 10 times 13 overpressurization is correct. We do not have a 14 number for you on --
15 MR. WARREN: (Inaudible comment from an 16 unmiked location.)
17 DR. BELLAMY: I don't recall that issue.
18 If it was an inspector, that was not the right person.
19 I am the right person. Get it to me, and we will get 20 back to you. We will get back to you on that.
21 The leakage issue is interesting. Since 22 Davis-Besse, we have changed exactly how we look at 23 monitored and unmonitored leakage in the claim. The 24 licensee has come up with a very sophisticated program 25
51 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 to check data about exactly how much leakage there is, 1
where is the leakage, is it monitored, and is it -- or 2
is it not monitored, and then we discuss it with them, 3
find out exactly what the issue might be. So that's 4
not an issue that's left on this.
5 The March 1st issue that you talk about, 6
there were critical events. You're absolutely right.
7 And if you go back and look at that inspection report, 8
you'll find that that was one of the issues that we 9
talk about with respect to the licensee's corrective 10 action program. Did they enter those issues into 11 their corrective action program? And what are they 12 doing about that?
13 Since that time, they have initiated an 14 entirely new corrective action program. We're still 15 monitoring.
16 So I hope I have answered some of your 17 questions. Make sure you talk to Marc about it before 18 you leave.
19 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Great. We're 20 going to have to go on. I'm sorry.
21 MR. WARREN: (Inaudible comment from an 22 unmiked location.)
23 FACILITATOR CAMERON: We're going to go on 24 to others that are signed up to comment.
25
52 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MR. WARREN: I know. I just wanted to 1
clarify a question. He said Chernobyl -- that there 2
was no Chernobyl reactor in the United States that 3
actually experience --
4 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Sir, you can make 5
that during the comment period.
6 MR. WARREN: My question is not about a 7
Chernobyl --
8 FACILITATOR CAMERON: We have to go on.
9 Thank you.
10 We're going to go to this gentleman, the 11 gentleman back there, this gentleman, and then we're 12 going to shift into the comment mode. Yes, sir, and 13 please introduce yourself.
14 MR. SIMONAIR: (Inaudible comment from an 15 unmiked location.)
16 FACILITATOR CAMERON: And you might want 17 to speak into the microphone.
18 MR. SIMONAIR: You can mount this under 19 a fault, and those tanks will only hold highly 20 radioactive radiation for 10,000 years, at most. So 21 some of this radiation doesn't go away for billions of 22 years. Then, you've got the radiation, you've got the 23
-- it's really hot stuff, this radiation. If they 24 ever lose water from it --
25
53 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Do you have a 1
question?
2 MR. SIMONAIR: I'm telling you what is 3
going to happen here.
4 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Well, when we get to 5
the comment period, why don't you get up and tell us 6
what the facts are. We want to try to answer 7
questions now.
8 MR. SIMONAIR: You know this.
9 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. You can --
10 MR. SIMONAIR: You know it, and you speak 11 it, because you're dealing with a genocide.
12 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. I think we 13 understand what you're telling us.
14 MR. SIMONAIR: You don't understand.
15 FACILITATOR CAMERON: We'll come back to 16 you. All right?
17 Yes, sir.
18 MR. STROUP: Thank you. My name is Ed 19 Stroup. I came to learn something about this process 20 today, and I have to tell you I think there are some 21 people here that tried to derail the discussion. I'm 22 interested in hearing about the license renewal 23 process and the environmental review process, because 24 we were under that part of the program.
25
54 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 I feel like I've gotten a trip around the 1
world, and a lot of -- heard a lot of things that are 2
purportedly facts that are way far from being true.
3 I would like to know -- are we going to be turning the 4
attention here today to talking about the license 5
renewal process and the environmental review process?
6 I came to hear about those things and to 7
learn about them, and I'd like to return knowing about 8
those things. Are you --
9 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Thank you, sir. Did 10 you have a specific question about any of the process 11 that the NRC staff talked about today? I mean, I've 12 heard you saying return to the agenda. I was just 13 wondering if you had a specific question.
14 MR. STROUP: I don't have a specific 15 question at this time. If I do, I'll ask it later.
16 I believe the NRC has a clear process that's 17 documented, well-known, and it is important that we 18 follow it. I came here today to hear from the NRC and 19 learn more about it, and I'd like to spend some time 20 on those subjects.
21 Thank you.
22 MS. FRANOVICH: Let me take a minute to --
23 a quick minute to thank the gentleman. These mikes 24 are not very good.
25
55 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 FACILITATOR CAMERON: You have to speak 1
up.
2 MS. FRANOVICH: We appreciate -- thank you 3
for your patience. This is an opportunity for the NRC 4
to answer questions that members of the public have, 5
and sometimes they kind of go beyond the purpose of 6
why we're here today. But we just try to accommodate 7
interest in other areas of our regulation. So thank 8
you for your interest, and we'll try to get back on 9
schedule with our comments.
10 Thank you.
11 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Yes, sir. And 12 please introduce yourself.
13 MR. CAMBRIA: Thomas Cambria. (Inaudible 14 comment from an unmiked location.)
15 MS. FRANOVICH: I don't. I would 16 speculate that it's the political environments that 17 Germany finds itself in right now, but I -- I don't 18 know how they plan to meet energy needs without 19 nuclear in the mix. I don't know. I'm afraid I don't 20 have an answer to your question.
21 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. I'm not sure 22 if someone else knows about that.
23 MS. FRANOVICH: Tag you after the meeting.
24 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Any other questions 25
56 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 about the license renewal process?
1 Okay. We're going to take two real quick 2
questions, and you're going to have to make them 3
quick, because then we're going to move on, so that we 4
can get an opportunity to listen to you a little bit 5
more formally.
6 UNIDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: (Inaudible 7
comment from an unmiked location.)
8 FACILITATOR CAMERON: And what is the 9
question about long term?
10 UNIDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: (Inaudible 11 comment from an unmiked location.)
12 MS. FRANOVICH: Yes, we're aware of that 13 issue.
14 FACILITATOR CAMERON: And can you just 15 tell us how the process will consider that. And this 16 is a good point, a good example of the type of issue, 17 because these are issues that we want to make sure 18 that we address when we develop the impact statement.
19 Mike?
20 DR. MASNIK: Finally, a question in my 21 area. This is a rather peculiar situation, because 22 the plant currently has a once-through cooling system.
23 And the State, who is responsible for regulating 24 discharges from the facility, has proposed a new NPDES 25
57 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 permit, which requires the licensee to take a hard 1
look at closed-cycle cooling, which would be cooling 2
towers, or come up with a site restoration plan to 3
offset the reported losses of aquatic life due to 4
operation of the facility.
5 At other facilities, we typically evaluate 6
the current cooling design and project that out into 7
the future during the license renewal period. In this 8
case, because we believe that the state has taken a 9
rather strong position in this area, and the fact that 10 the draft permit clearly proposes closed-cycle cooling 11 for the facility, we believe that it would be in the 12 best interest of the public and the regulators to 13 evaluate both closed-cycle cooling and once-through 14 cooling.
15 So what the staff will look at is the 16 effects of a cooling tower, as well as the effects of 17 continued once-through operation.
18 FACILITATOR CAMERON: And that will be an 19 analysis that will be in the draft environmental 20 impact statement, and that will be open for your 21 comment at another public meeting.
22 I don't think that -- to just summarize 23 what I thought I heard about the spent fuel is that 24 spent fuel storage at a plant, whether it's wet 25
58 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 storage or dry storage, is governed by NRC regulations 1
and licenses, as appropriate.
2 The national strategy as it is in the 3
Nuclear Waste Policy Act, national legislation, is to 4
focus on exploring one site -- that's the Yucca 5
Mountain, Nevada site -- to permanently dispose of the 6
stored waste.
7 The Department of Energy is in charge of 8
doing that investigation. They were supposed to come 9
to the NRC. We have to license that. We don't have 10 to license it. We have to review it. They need a 11 license from us before they can dispose of it. They 12 have not come in with a license application yet.
13 The last I heard is that there is some 14 legislation that might be introduced that perhaps 15 changed the national strategy. And, Mr. Mercurio, 16 that's -- I think we're going to have to leave it 17 there, and I'd be glad to talk to you in more detail.
18 I'm going to give Mr. Jackson one more 19 question, and then let's go to the public comment 20 portion of the meeting. Mr. Jackson, it's in your 21 hands.
22 MR. JACKSON: Again, Tom Jackson from 23 Manahawkin. Just a quick comment on Senator Drucks.
24 His legislative aide, Mr. Smith, just was in contact 25
59 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 with me on the cell phone here, and they wrote letters 1
and stuff. This gentleman here. Apparently, he 2
didn't know the proper titles and numbers to use, and 3
what section of the law to reference, so these letters 4
were written but he didn't have the proper information 5
where to direct it.
6 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Right.
7 MR. JACKSON: I didn't quite understand 8
the gentleman, but I know that I've been told that at 9
Hope Creek they have an atomic powerplant, and that 10 powerplant has a cooling tower. Well, I want to know, 11 at Oyster Creek, do we have a cooling tower?
12 FACILITATOR CAMERON: You've asked a 13 specific question, do we have a cooling tower at --
14 DR. MASNIK: No. There is no cooling 15 tower comparable to the cooling tower at -- that's 16 comparable to the one at Hope Creek. There is no --
17 it is once-through cooling. Water is heated and 18 discharged directly into Oyster Creek.
19 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay.
20 MR. JACKSON: Once-through cooling at 21 OysterCreek.
22 DR. MASNIK: That's correct.
23 MR. JACKSON: Whereas at Hope Creek it 24 goes through a cooling tower first, and then it -
25
60 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 DR. MASNIK: Yes. Okay.
1 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Thank you, Mr.
2 Jackson, and thank you for those questions. We owe 3
you some answers on a couple of things, and we're 4
going to take care of that in various ways.
5 We're going to go to the second part of 6
the meeting, which is to ask you to give us your 7
comments and recommendations on what we should look at 8
when we do the environmental review. I think we've 9
already heard about some of those concerns.
10 It always is useful to hear what a 11 company's rationale is behind license renewal, and I 12 think we -- that may be particularly important this 13 afternoon, because we have heard a couple of people 14 talk about why isn't this shorter term, why isn't this 15 five years.
16 So I'm going to ask two representatives 17 from the company to talk to us, again within our 18 guidelines, about what their vision, their rationale 19 is, and then we're going to go to the rest of the 20 people. We have a dozen or so people who want to talk 21 to us, so we're going to go to that.
22 So I'm going to go to -- ask Mr. Bud 23 Swenson from AmerGen to come up and talk to us, and 24 then we're going to go to Fred Polaski.
25
61 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 (Applause.)
1 And then, we're going to go to Mr. Jackson 2
again for comment.
3 All right. This is Mr. Swenson. Mr.
4 Swenson?
5 MR. SWENSON: Thank you. Good afternoon.
6 My name is Bud Swenson. I'm the Site Vice President 7
at Oyster Creek Generating Station, and I'm the one 8
accountable for the safe and reliable operation of 9
that facility.
10 I'd like to thank the NRC for holding this 11 public meeting. In addition, I'd like to thank all of 12 you for taking time out of your busy schedules to 13 attend this important meeting. I believe it's 14 important to our community to have this opportunity.
15 Today Oyster Creek has the longest track 16 record of safe operations in the U.S. nuclear 17 industry. License renewal presents an opportunity for 18 the continued employment of 450 area residents and the 19 continued
- clean, safe, reliable production of 20 electricity to meet our ever-growing demand in the 21 region. I'm truly pleased for the employees at Oyster 22 Creek and for the residents of Ocean County.
23 More than 450 families, not including our 24 security personnel, depend on our plant for their 25
62 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 livelihood. Of these 450 employees, approximately 250 1
are members of the International Brotherhood of 2
Electrical Workers, Local 1289. These are good, high-3 paying jobs with excellent benefits. Our employees 4
are highly skilled and dedicated, and I'm proud to 5
work with them.
6 When I first came to Oyster Creek, a local 7
resident told me, "Run Oyster Creek safely. Do a good 8
job, and, most importantly, keep that plant open, 9
because a lot of my neighbors work there." The safe 10 operation of Oyster Creek is our top priority, and it 11 is important for our community that we continue to 12 operate.
13 Oyster Creek strengthens our community in 14 so many ways. We are a significant employer and a 15 public -- and a positive economic force in the local 16 area. The operation of Oyster Creek adds $52 million 17 to Ocean County. We spend $7.7 million on goods in 18 Ocean County and pay $9.2 million in sales and local 19 taxes every year. We contribute $234 million to Ocean 20 County's domestic product annually, if we value the 21 electrical production that's considered.
22 And we have led the way to $33 million in 23 increased output in Ocean County and $46-1/2 million 24 more in economic output in New Jersey itself every 25
63 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 year.
1 In addition, Oyster Creek employees are 2
community-minded and generous. Oyster Creek has the 3
largest employee-run United Way campaign in Ocean 4
County. This past year our employees raised more than 5
$180,000 for the United Way.
6 Our employees are involved in the American 7
Red Cross, Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, and 8
the American Cancer Society. They are Little League 9
coaches, Girl and Boy Scout leaders, volunteer EMTs 10 and firefighters, and PTA members. We support a 11 variety of family and youth organizations and 12 activities in local communities, and have donated to 13
-- land to the community for recreational use.
14 Oyster Creek provides a
tremendous 15 environmental benefit to the community. Oyster Creek 16 represents 20 percent of JCP&L's electricity needs.
17 Not only do we produce nine percent of New Jersey's 18 electricity, but we also do this with virtually no 19 Greenhouse emissions.
20 Each year we operate Oyster Creek avoids 21 some 7-1/2 million metric tons of carbon dioxide that 22 would have been produced in coastal New Jersey by 23 replacement of a coal plant. That replacement plant 24 would produce carbon emissions equivalent to two 25
64 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 million cars, nearly half of all the cars in New 1
Jersey now.
2 The clean air benefits of nuclear power 3
production are of critical importance to New Jersey, 4
the United States, and the world as we look for 5
solutions to the Greenhouse gas impacts.
6 In addition to the inherent environmental 7
benefits of nuclear power, at Oyster Creek we go to 8
great lengths to minimize our impact to the 9
environment. We live here. We raise our families 10 here. It's just as important to us as it is to you 11 that we operate this plant safely and protect our 12 natural resources.
13 Ocean County is a beautiful place to raise 14 a family, and I'm proud to be a resident.
15 At Oyster Creek we do everything we can to 16 protect the Barnegat Bay. We have a constant focus on 17 planning and executing our work to minimize the impact 18 to the environment. On a day-to-day, hour-to-hour 19 basis, we monitor water temperatures. We regularly 20 take water samples to ensure compliance with 21 regulations.
22 We also coordinate any planned load 23 reductions and shutdowns to avoid the risk to marine 24 life. This practice is often costly, but it's 25
65 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 essential to meet our commitment to the environment.
1 Just this past weekend we performed a routine power 2
reduction, and due to our environmental team there was 3
no environmental impact.
4 At other public meetings, some raised 5
questions about our use of chlorine. We do use 6
chlorine to keep the plant's condenser tubes clean and 7
improve the efficiency of the plant. However, it's 8
virtually non-detectable by the time it gets out of 9
the condenser, and it certainly is not toxic to fish 10 or any other living organisms.
11 In addition, we are well below the 12 allowable amounts of chlorine allowed by our discharge 13 permits. Our employees are trained to do their jobs 14 with environmental protection in mind. One practice 15 that we are particularly proud of is our commitment to 16 protect sea turtles that become caught in our intakes.
17 We have specific procedures in place for 18 the safe return of all sea turtles to their natural 19 environment. Our operators are trained to identify, 20 to remove, and, if need be, resuscitate those turtles.
21 When a sea turtle is found, our operators contact the 22 Brigantine Marine Mammal Stranding Center, which 23 recovers the sea turtle, gives it a checkup, 24 rehabilitates it if necessary, and releases it back to 25
66 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 the sea.
1 We also partner with Drexel University to 2
track the number of sea turtles that are rescued from 3
our intake canal. Oyster Creek has modified its 4
intake structures to significantly reduce the impact 5
on aquatic life. Fish and crabs caught in our intake 6
screens are gently returned to the discharge canal, 7
and we pump cool water from the intake canal to the 8
discharge canal, diluting the warmer water coming out 9
of the plant.
10 Oyster Creek is also involved in several 11 environmental projects. Most recently, we purchased 12 a boat for the Rutgers Extension Service Clam 13 Restoration Project. The project team is working on 14 reestablishing clam beds in the Barnegat Bay, and the 15 boat will be used to more efficiently implement the 16 restoration of the clam beds and other important 17 environmental projects in the future.
18 We are a staunch protector of the South 19 Jersey wildlife and natural resources. We support the 20 New Jersey Audubon Society. We've donated a 21 significant amount of money to the organization in 22 recognition for the society's efforts to help rescue 23 and clean waterfowl impacted by the recent oil spills 24 in the Delaware River.
25
67 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Our employees are also involved in many 1
environmental activities in the area, including the 2
World Series of Birding, aiding the Cape May 3
Observatory, and Ocean Nature and Conservation 4
Society, and also the Barnegat Bay Estuary.
5 Oyster Creek is not the same plant that it 6
was when it was first built. We've invested over 7
$1.2 billion in upgrades to maintain it to today's 8
highest standards. We work hard to achieve our 9
commitment to clean, safe, and reliable operations.
10 We've kept this promise for 36 years, and we're 11 committed to serving our community for another 20 12 years.
13 Again, I want to thank the NRC for this 14 opportunity to provide comments and for your 15 consideration of our license renewal application.
16 Thank you.
17 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Thank you very much, 18 Mr. Swenson.
19 We're going to go to Mr. Fred Polaski, who 20 I believe is going to speak to some more specific 21 issues. Fred, thank you.
22 MR. POLASKI: Thank you, Chip. My name is 23 Fred Polaski. I am Exelon's corporate manager for 24 license renewal. I'm responsible for the preparation 25
68 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 and the review of the Oyster Creek license renewal 1
application.
2 I was previously responsible for our 3
applications which were accepted and approved by the 4
NRC for renewal of licenses at Peach Bottom in 5
Pennsylvania, and Dresden and Quad Cities plants in 6
7 Just briefly about myself, I've been 8
working in nuclear power for 34 years. I worked at 9
the Peach Bottom plant for 20 years, and held a senior 10 reactor operator license there for 13 years, spent two 11 years working in our Limerick plant, two years working 12 in our corporate nuclear quality assurance program, 13 and for almost the last 10 years have worked in 14 license renewal, both on projects within Exelon and 15 throughout the industry.
16 Mr. Swenson spoke about reasons for 17 renewing the license for Oyster Creek. I'd like to 18 speak briefly about the process for preparing these 19 license renewal applications and the amount of work 20 and engineering effort that was put into preparing the 21 application.
22 In 2003, AmerGen decided to pursue a 23 license renewal application for Oyster Creek.
24 Preparation of that application began in October of 25
69 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 that year, and we submitted the application to the 1
Nuclear Regulatory Commission on July 22, 2005.
2 The application, if you've seen it, when 3
you print it out is about 2,400 pages. And when you 4
put it in books it's about that thick, a huge amount 5
of information, but that only represents a small part 6
of all the work that was done in the investigation, in 7
the engineering analysis, to prepare that application.
8 Our estimate is that the body of 9
information, if we printed it all out, would be at 10 least 100 times that amount of information in volume.
11 In preparation of that, we invested over 12 40 man-years of engineering work at a cost of over $5 13 million in preparation of it. Once we completed our 14 engineering work to prepare that application, AmerGen 15 performed extensive management reviews of the 16 application. We brought in experts from outside 17 AmerGen for review, including some former Nuclear 18 Regulatory Commission managers, to review application 19 to ensure that it was complete, thorough, and 20 accurate.
21 I'd now like to talk a little bit about 22 the two different parts of the review. I understand 23 that the primary subject of today's meeting deals with 24 the environmental review, but I'd like to talk also 25
70 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 about the safety review that we performed as part of 1
this application.
2 What we did in that review was to perform 3
a review of the history and the condition of all the 4
safety equipment in the plant. We did that to 5
determine whether the necessary maintenance was being 6
performed on that equipment to make sure that the 7
equipment will be able to operate it when it's needed 8
under emergency situations, not only today but for the 9
next additional 20 years of operation.
10 When you look back at Oyster Creek, when 11 it was built, all of the equipment was brand new. It 12 was thoroughly tested to make sure it would perform 13 properly. But like anything else, equipment does age.
14 That doesn't mean it won't work, but it does age, and 15 there is -- certain things need to be done with it 16 with respect to time.
17 Maintenance is performed on it. Sometimes 18 equipment is refurbished. Some pieces of equipment 19 may be replaced. There may be modifications done to 20 the plant to upgrade the equipment in the plant. We 21 reviewed all of that work to make sure that the proper 22 maintenance is going on today, and we'll continue in 23 the additional 20 years of operation to make sure that 24 aging that equipment is properly managed and the 25
71 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 equipment will operate properly.
1 We also reviewed calculations that were 2
performed as part of the original design of the plant 3
that were done to ensure that the plant could operate 4
safely for 40 years. We analyzed those calculations 5
and were able to confirm that the plant would be able 6
to operate safely for 60 years.
7
- Overall, our conclusion from our 8
engineering review was that Oyster Creek can operate 9
safely for another 60 years, or up to 60 years, and 10 we'll be able to maintain its operating condition 11 required by its design.
12 That's the same conclusion that the NRC 13 talked about earlier as a requirement for the 14 application. We were able to conclude that as part of 15 our review.
16 We also took a look at the environmental 17 impacts of continuing to operate Oyster Creek. We 18 looked at all aspects of continued impact of the plant 19 on the environment. If you remember, Dr. Masnik had 20 a slide up before that showed all of the different 21 aspects that the NRC reviews. We reviewed all of 22 those aspects also, and provided to the NRC the 23 conclusions of our review on all of the areas.
24 Our conclusion is that the impacts on the 25
72 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 environment are small, and I use the term "small" in 1
the sense that it is in the regulation, and that's 2
that the impact will not have much impact on the 3
environment. And not being an environmentalist, I 4
tend to think of that more in terms that I'm more used 5
to as an engineer whose been operating powerplants, 6
and that the impact on the environment of continued 7
operation with an additional 20 years will be no more 8
significant than it is today.
9 We also took a look at part of our review 10 and alternatives if Oyster Creek would not have its 11 license renewed and another source of electric 12 generation would have to be installed either here 13 onsite or someplace else to generate 600 megawatts of 14 electricity, and concluded that any other means of 15 generating 600 megawatts would have more of an impact 16 on the environment than continued operation of Oyster 17 Creek.
18 I think one thing we need to keep in mind, 19 though, here is that whatever we do, whether it's 20 generating electricity, driving a car, building a new 21 home, building a new industry, a new plant someplace 22 for people to work, it all has impacts on the 23 environment. And our charge in this is to make sure 24 that we are assessing that and minimizing the impact 25
73 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 on the environment to take all of that into 1
consideration.
2 We did that in our review, and we 3
concluded that the impact on the environment of 4
continuing to operate Oyster Creek is the best 5
alternative for continued generation of 600 megawatts.
6 In conclusion, AmerGen's management and I 7
personally believe that Oyster Creek is a safely 8
operated plant and can operate for an additional 20 9
years in a safe manner. It'll provide 600 megawatts 10 of electricity that's not only safe, but it's clean, 11 reliable, environmentally friendly, and economical.
12 Continued operation of Oyster Creek will benefit this 13 community, the State of New Jersey, and our country.
14 Thank you.
15 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thank you.
16 Thank you, Mr. Polaski.
17 Why don't we go to Mr. Jackson, and then 18 Mr. Stroup. Mr. Jackson, if you want to come forward, 19 or are you staying right there?
20 MR. JACKSON: I am Tom Jackson. For 20 21 years, I have worked as an industrial engineering 22 technician. For the last 10 years, I have worked 23 (Inaudible comment from an unmiked location.) in terms 24 of working.
25
74 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 So even as of 1981, the technology that 1
existed then, one of the areas of from time to time 2
was the water purification section -- (ICFUL) recovery 3
towers, (ICFUL) recovery towers, various aspects. And 4
when the water was discharged into the (ICFUL) River, 5
which occurred in most of the (ICFUL) -- the by, the 6
ocean -- (ICFUL) tanks (ICFUL) clean water as of 7
(ICFUL).
8 Now, we had found earlier, based on 9
(ICFUL), that both federal and state organizations 10 (ICFUL) that the Hope Creek, New Jersey atomic 11 powerplant (ICFUL). And now (ICFUL), we had a (ICFUL) 12 recovery time and (ICFUL). I'm not aware of a fish 13 kill at (ICFUL) Creek. At the Oyster Creek facility, 14 to my knowledge, (ICFUL). But I'm aware (ICFUL) not 15 one, but three massive fish kills.
16 We have learned today that the Oyster 17 Creek facility still does not have (ICFUL). We have 18 heard from two gentlemen -- this surprised me -- that 19 they are environmentally conscious. They are 20 conscious of (ICFUL).
21 The discharge site needs further work. We 22 need a water cooler (ICFUL) there on the discharge 23 site. We do not need these fish kills anymore. Part 24 of the renewal process for this license should be a 25
75 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 consideration of a coolant tower should be built.
1 (Applause.)
2 (ICFUL) one at Hope Creek. We need one at 3
Oyster Creek. Thank you.
4 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Thank you very much, 5
Mr. Jackson, for that comment directly from and I 6
think to -- to our evaluation.
7 Now we're going to go to Mr. Ed Stroup.
8 Mr. Stroup, would you like to join us up here?
9 MR. STROUP: Sure. Hello. My name is Ed 10 Stroup. I live at 545 Longboat Avenue in Beachwood.
11 I'm President of IBEW Local 1289, and I represent 12 approximately 250 members at Oyster Creek, and a 13 little bit over 400 at Jersey Central Power and Light.
14 On behalf of all of those employees, many 15 of these employees play active roles in Oyster Creek's 16 environmental program. They are committed to 17 achieving a balance between making the megawatts that 18 we all need and protecting the environment, and they 19 work hard at that. When you compare nuclear with 20 other baseload fuels, nuclear is the environmental 21 choice without question, and Oyster Creek has more 22 experience safely producing clean energy than any 23 other nuclear plant in the country.
24 The employees are highly trained to 25
76 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 operate the plant, and all of its systems, which are 1
regularly upgraded to meet the strict operating and 2
environmental standards. Local 1289 urges the NRC to 3
objectively consider all of the facts about Oyster 4
Creek within your proven review process.
5 The facts will clearly show that Oyster 6
Creek is ready and able to produce clean power for an 7
additional 20 years.
8 Thank you very much.
9 (Applause.)
10 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thank you, 11 Mr. Stroup.
12 We're going to go next to Mr. Don Warren, 13 and then to Mr. Tom Cervasio, and then to Wayne 14 Romberg. Mr. Warren --
15 UNIDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: One question.
16 Can we question that gentleman that was just at the 17 microphone?
18 FACILITATOR CAMERON: After the meeting if 19 you want.
20 UNIDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: We can't ask a 21 question now?
22 FACILITATOR CAMERON: No, because we 23 really need to get all of you on with your ideas for 24 us. But I'm sure he'd be glad to talk to you 25
77 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 afterwards.
1 UNIDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: Thank you.
2 FACILITATOR CAMERON: And is this Mr.
3 Warren?
4 MR. CERVASIO: No. Cervasio, Tom 5
Cervasio.
6 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay.
7 MR. WARREN: He can go ahead of me. That 8
would be fine.
9 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Is that okay 10 with you, Mr. Warren?
11 MR. WARREN: It's all right.
12 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Mr. Cervasio, 13 go ahead, and then we'll go to Mr. Warren.
14 MR. CERVASIO: My name is Tom Cervasio.
15 I am Chairman of EnvirowatchM, and we have a question 16 for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Two-thirds of 17 the Nuclear Regulatory Commission represents the 18 people in the nuclear industry. By their past and 19 present action, it appears that they represent, rather 20 than regulate, the nuclear industry. But if they were 21 looking out for the health, safety, and welfare of the 22 people, it wouldn't be a question of if a license was 23 renewed or denied, but of when.
24 The renewal should be denied for the 25
78 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 following reasons. The New Jersey emergency planning 1
evacuation plan will not work, so, therefore, the 2
plant should be shut down. Presently, there is no 3
permanent safe storage of nuclear waste, so rather 4
than continue to produce this toxic byproduct, the 5
plant should be shut down.
6 There is no backup power source for 7
warning sirens around the plant. So in the event of 8
an emergency resulting in the loss of a siren, the 9
public would be ignorant of dangers. So, therefore, 10 the plant should be shut down.
11 Federal law requires that licensees 12 operating near the coast must adhere to state 13 environmental rules. Oyster Creek does not, so, 14 therefore, the plant should be shut down.
15 Oyster Creek's present water and intake 16 system destroys fresh marine life. In the year 2002, 17 the plant was fined $50,000 for killing 5,876 fish.
18 If the Oyster Creek plant does not construct a cooling 19 tower, the plant will continue to contribute to the 20 loss of habitat in the remaining estuary, so, 21 therefore, the plant should be shut down.
22 The parent utility should be required to 23 install state-of-the-art structural steel encasements 24 around the spent fuel storage pool -- an above-ground 25
79 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 storage facility. Such encasements should be able to 1
withstand if they were hit by an airplane or a 2
missile.
3 Furthermore, please add to the record that 4
the Federal Government should not subsidize the new 5
construction of nuclear plants until the problem of 6
safe storage of nuclear waste is solved, an issue not 7
covered by the new energy bill passed by the Congress.
8 Therefore, we ask, for the good of the 9
people and the environment, that the NRC and the DEP 10 deny the renewal of a license for the continued 11 operation of the Oyster Creek nuclear plant.
12 Thank you very much.
13 (Applause.)
14 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Thank you, Mr.
15 Cervasio.
16 We're going to go to Mr. Warren. Do you 17 want to come up here, Mr. Warren?
18 MR. WARREN: Sure.
19 FACILITATOR CAMERON: All right.
20 MR. WARREN: Hi. Actually, I'd like to 21 start by clarifying a couple of things. The first 22 thing I was clarifying is the gentleman stated before 23 that there are no Chernobyl-style plants operating in 24 the United States. Although this is true with the 25
80 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 graphite reactor, the one that they were operating was 1
closed down.
2 The point is not the type of reactor. The 3
point is the type of accident that can come from it, 4
and that type of accident is a massive radiation 5
release. And these are the -- this is what is going 6
to cause a Chernobyl-like incident. It's not 7
necessarily a fire, but if Oyster Creek -- because of 8
its age, does have a catastrophic release of 9
radiation, the plant in Chernobyl is only two years 10 old. Oyster Creek has far more radiation there. So 11 even a significant percentage of that would be 12 catastrophic to the environment.
13 Another thing I'd like to point out is 14 that I came to the original meeting, and I had 15 pictures to show, and I was informed that there were 16 certain regulations at the meeting, and the pictures 17 that I had to show did not meet that. So I didn't try 18 to change the regulations to meet what I was looking 19 for.
20 I complied to the regulations. I assumed 21 that they had reasons for it. I mean, I could imagine 22 if everybody came in here with a big poster. So I 23 understood why they have these regulations.
24 I also used to work as an electrician, and 25
81 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 they have something called the electrical code, and 1
the electrical code is established by looking at how 2
fires and accidents have occurred in the past, and 3
creating codes to make sure that things are built so 4
that these don't happen in the future.
5 This is what the NRC should be doing. The 6
NRC has a set of codes, but it seems that every time 7
one of these plants doesn't meet these codes, they 8
change the codes for them to comply. And this is not 9
proper regulation. Their obligation is to keep us as 10 safe as possible. If you're dealing with a plant that 11 was designed back in 1962, and is already considered 12 to be obsolete by many experts, then certainly we 13 shouldn't be relaxing any of the regulations.
14 When Oyster Creek was found to be non-15 compliant with the turtle kills for their intake, 16 speaking of environmental issues, they petitioned to 17 have it increased -- the amount that they could kill 18 increased. This is not responsible to the community.
19 This is not responsible to the environment.
20 They love to say that they don't produce 21 fossil fuels, yet the material that they use, the fuel 22 has to be mined. There's a tremendous amount of 23 fossil fuels that are used in the production to get a 24 plant running and to keep it running.
25
82 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 When you look at other alternative 1
- energies, in the case of
- wind, solar, and 2
conservation, they can easily make up for it. A 3
gentleman before asked about why Germany had switched.
4 Germany has switched because of safety concerns and 5
because Europe is finding that alternative energies 6
are actually filling the gap. The technology has come 7
of age, and it is working.
8 We are asked to renew the license for 9
AmerGen, so that they can continue because they're a 10 business. And I understand they wanted to continue, 11 because they're a business, but we're a community, and 12 we have an obligation to the community. I'm a health 13 care provider in this community, and my obligation is 14 to the children of this community.
15 And this is the reason why I'm here. This 16 is the reason why I spend my days off to come here, 17 because if I'm working in a hospital, if I can save 18 one person's life in a year, to me that's an 19 incredible accomplishment. Shutting this plant down 20 has the potential to save hundreds of thousands of 21 lives in this community for generations and 22 generations to come.
23 This child here was not born at the time 24 the Chernobyl accident happened. This child was born 25
83 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 years later, and this is the legacy of nuclear power.
1 This is what happens. This plant, on a daily basis, 2
when everything is working fine, is releasing 3
radiation into the environment. It's releasing it in 4
particulate form.
5 It's contamination that stays in the 6
environment, and it's not like going and getting an X-7 ray at the doctor's office where you get zapped one 8
time and then it's gone. This stuff goes into your 9
body, it's built into your bones in the form of 10 strontium-90, it goes in your muscle -- and cesium-11 137. And the science has proven to show this.
12 There's a condition called Chernobyl 13 heart, which develops in children having so much 14 cesium in their heart muscle that they actually 15 develop birth defects.
16 The point I'm trying to make here is they 17 talk about the environmental impact. There's a 18 tremendous environmental impact when Oyster Creek 19 continues to operate every day. The fact that they 20 are unwilling to spend the money for a cooling tower, 21 which is exactly what it comes to -- everybody has 22 seemed to look at it, including the Environmental 23 Protection Agency, and say this is the best 24 alternative, yet Oyster Creek is looking for the 25
84 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 cheaper way out. This is not true community concern.
1 The issue with chlorination, constantly 2
dumping this chlorine. For the man to make a 3
statement that chlorine is not toxic to fish, I've had 4
an aquarium, and one of the first things you do in an 5
aquarium is you dechlorinate the water before you put 6
it in, or it will kill your fish.
7 Granted, you can dilute it down to 8
quantities that may be acceptable, but to say that 9
it's not having an environmental impact is not -- is 10 not correct science. Because of this, this is why I'm 11 focusing my environmental question on, again, the 12 leakage from the plant and the radioactivity from this 13 leakage from this plant.
14 Without a closed loop system, this extra 15 contamination from Oyster Creek is ending up in our 16 environment, because these leaks aren't all going into 17 controlled areas. These leaks are going into the 18 recirculating cooling water area, because of the 19 design of the plant.
20 So this is an environmental concern that 21 I feel must be taken into consideration when deciding 22 to issue an environmental permit for Oyster Creek in 23 this licensing renewal.
24 Another thing I'd also like to point out 25
85 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
-- that Oyster Creek is handing out bumper stickers.
1 And I'd like to notice the flaw in the bumper sticker, 2
the lack of quality control. I think this is just 3
kind of par for the course for Oyster Creek. They 4
can't even seem to get a bumper sticker right.
5 (Applause.)
6 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Thank you, Mr.
7 Warren.
8 Mr. Romberg? And then, to Judith Cambria.
9 MR. ROMBERG: I don't think this is 10 working at all. Anyway, my name is Wayne Romberg. My 11 family and I live at 738 Fairview Lane in Forked 12 River. That's on the south branch of the Forked 13 River, and I live about a mile from the plant.
14 And by the way, I chose to live there. I 15 moved here about four years ago. I'm part of the 16 plant staff. I have a Master's in nuclear 17 engineering. I've been doing this for 37 years.
18 I favor the licensing of Oyster Creek. As 19 a
powerplant engineer, I
understand that all 20 generation facilities have some impact on the 21 environment, and that doesn't matter if it's solar or 22 wind power or fossil or nuclear. It's just a fact of 23 life.
24 Oyster Creek, as a nuclear facility, is 25
86 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 capable of producing power for over 6,000 homes in New 1
Jersey, day or night, wind or no wind, while it 2
produces zero carbon emissions. In fact, we avoid the 3
generation of carbon emissions equivalent to half the 4
cars driven in New Jersey on a given day.
5 The employees at Oyster Creek -- and there 6
are about 450 of them -- are highly trained and 7
environmentally sensitive. We're a zero discharge 8
plant. We have modified their turbine cooling water 9
intake to be fish-friendly with soft sprays to return 10 fish to the environment. Our intake screens are sized 11 to be environmentally friendly. So we've changed some 12 things over the years to make the plant more friendly 13 to the environment.
14 We have a program that trains our 15 operators to rescue sea turtles, and I think you heard 16 about that earlier. When we're unsuccessful, it's 17 generally because that sea turtle got to us injured.
18 Boat propellers is the most frequent injury that we 19 see. And, obviously, when it gets to us cut open from 20 the boat propeller, it's hard to resuscitate them.
21 Our startups and shutdowns, we have worked 22 very hard in the last couple of years to do very slow 23 startups and slow shutdowns, because that's 24 environmentally friendly. And since we've started 25
87 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 doing that, we've had no fish kills as a result. The 1
fish don't like a fast change of temperature.
2 We minimize the use of chlorine as a 3
biocide. And by the way, all powerplants that have 4
once-through condensers use biocide. That's -- I 5
mean, all over the state, that's the way it is unless 6
you've got a cooling tower, and a cooling tower is a 7
whole different issue around economic investment and 8
whether or not it's the right thing to do.
9 I know as a resident, I don't want a 10 cooling tower. I'm going to have salt spray all over 11 my car and my house, and so on. That's enough for me 12 or my neighbors.
13 It's a well-known fact that the best 14 fishing in the area, in Ocean County, is on Route 9 on 15 the Oyster Creek discharge. You can go down there 16 this afternoon and count the fishermen and count the 17 fish they're getting. You know, I anchor my boat. I 18 have an environmentally friendly sailboat. We anchor 19 it in Oyster Creek. We get blue shell crabs there.
20 We swim there. You know, we feel good about it.
21 I support the relicensing of Oyster Creek 22 as a way to provide power for New Jersey with the 23 least environmental impact.
24 I thank you.
25
88 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 (Applause.)
1 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thank you 2
very much, Mr. Romberg.
3 We'll go next to Judith Cambria, and then 4
we're going to go to Bud Thoman.
5 MS. CAMBRIA: How's that? Does it pick up 6
there? No? Is it picking up?
7 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Can you hear her?
8 UNIDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: No.
9 MS. CAMBRIA: Okay. Why not?
10 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Maybe you just 11 need --
12 MS. CAMBRIA: How about that?
13 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Is that better?
14 I'll tell you what, why don't you just use this.
15 MS. CAMBRIA: Why don't I use that.
16 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay.
17 MS. CAMBRIA: Thank you. My name is 18 Judith Cambria. I live at 80 Windwood Drive, 19 Manahawkin, New Jersey. However, previous to that my 20 husband and I lived in Barnegat Light for some 15, 16 21 years, and we looked directly across the bay at the 22 Oyster Creek plant. So it was our very close 23 neighbor.
24 And before I make any other remarks, I 25
89 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 would just say that the standard thought in our home 1
was that, if anything went wrong at the Oyster Creek 2
plant, we would immediately pull out the largest 3
amount of alcohol that we could find, we could consume 4
it, because there was no way --
5 (Laughter.)
6
-- in the world we were going to be able 7
to get out.
8 (Laughter.)
9 So I say to you, I have not -- I do not in 10 any way pretend, when I speak to you today, that I am 11 an expert. I have not spent a lot of time studying 12 this in any way, shape, or form. Actually, I'm 13 involved very much in a lot of state issues, and I am 14 an expert in them. So I'm not speaking to you today 15 as an expert. I'm speaking to you today as a very, 16 very concerned individual.
17 And I think that today we're talking more 18 about environmental impact, where we seem to get off 19 on a lot of things, but very much environmental 20 impact. And I do truly believe that the environmental 21 impact on the aquatic life and overall -- not just 22 fish, all others, has been very, very devastating.
23 And we are so overfishing, as it is out 24 there, once they get bigger, that we need to be able 25
90 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 to have as many possible make it to that point, and so 1
they can become part of our food supply. So I'm very 2
concerned about that, and I think when we talk about 3
environmental effects, the big environmental effect 4
that scares me, and should scare all of us, is what 5
happens if it really goes wrong. And it worries me 6
terribly that we're taking an old, obsolete plant and 7
saying, "Let's put 20 more years on it."
8 The particular concern -- and this is not 9
just here in this area, but having read about it in 10 the newspapers -- is our utter and complete failure 11 after all of these years to come up with any solution, 12 reasonable solution, to what to do with the rods that 13 are left, the things that are so completely 14 contaminated, so heavily contaminated.
15 And we kept hearing -- you know, I'm not 16 young, so I've been hearing for years and years and 17 years how they're going to solve this problem. Well, 18 we're no closer to it now than we were 30, 40, 50 19 years ago. And what we are a lot closer to is all, 20 and I mean all, those rods that are right up the road 21 apiece.
22 And so I am very frightened about those.
23 We keep adding more and more to them with no -- no --
24 nothing in sight of getting rid of them. And I also 25
91 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 am concerned because I think that New Jersey, if we're 1
talking about terrorism, I think New Jersey is 2
probably one of the highest priority targets for any 3
terrorist in the world, because New Jersey is such a 4
crossroads, has so many industries, so many things.
5 So as I say, I am not an expert, but I did 6
want to share with you my concerns. And I certainly 7
do not want my grandchildren or great-grandchildren to 8
look anything like the picture that the gentleman 9
showed earlier.
10 Thank you.
11 (Applause.)
12 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thank you 13 very much, Judith.
14 Mr. Thoman?
15 MR. THOMAN: I don't know if this is -- is 16 this working?
17 UNIDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: I don't think 18 so.
19 FACILITATOR CAMERON: I think it's 20 working.
21 MR. THOMAN: Hello? No.
22 FACILITATOR CAMERON: All right.
23 MR. THOMAN: Put this in here? All right.
24 I'll speak out loud. Good afternoon. I'm Bud Thoman.
25
92 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 I am a business agent for the International 1
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 94.
2 Thank you for the opportunity to speak on 3
behalf of our members, and I urge you to conduct a 4
thorough review of the Oyster Creek license renewal 5
application. You will clearly find that Oyster Creek 6
is safe, it complies with environmental regulations, 7
and it will continue to do so.
8 Most importantly, Oyster Creek is a 9
critical part of the New Jersey infrastructure that we 10 cannot afford to lose. It serves a significant 11 portion of the demand in this region, some 600,000 12 homes, without polluting the air. Additionally, most 13 people in this area and around the state support the 14 relicensing of Oyster Creek, because they understand 15 that it is safe, and has been a good neighbor and 16 taxpayer.
17 The continued safe, clean, and reliable 18 operation of Oyster Creek is critical for the long-19 term energy stability in New Jersey, and vital if we 20 are to reduce Greenhouse gases emissions as proposed 21 by both the state and federal governments, while also 22 meeting the energy demands of New Jersey consumers.
23 Oyster Creek is a non-polluting energy 24 supplier, and that is important to our environment.
25
93 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 It is an enormous economic engine, and it is vital 1
that it continues to be online to meet the growing 2
demand for electricity in New Jersey.
3 We support Oyster Creek license renewal, 4
and we are confident that you will find it is the 5
right thing to do as well.
6 Thank you.
7 (Applause.)
8 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thank you 9
very much.
10 We're next going to go to Mr. Frydendahl.
11 We've heard from him before. He's going to speak to 12 us, and then we're going to go to Chip Gerrity.
13 Mr. Frydendahl?
14 MR. FRYDENDAHL: Good afternoon. I'm Ed 15 Frydendahl from Manchester, New Jersey, formerly a 32-16 year resident of Lacey Township, with family still 17 residing in Berkley Township in Barnegat and in 18 Beachwood.
19 I have one concern that bothers me, and 20 I'd like to share it with you, and that is that I 21 can't go up in a private plane or a small plane, or 22 any kind of a plane and fly over Disneyland, Disney 23 World, or -- now we'll bring it closer to home --
24 first, Great Adventure in Jackson, because it's 25
94 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 restricted air space.
1 Now, we've heard a lot this afternoon from 2
both sides of the aisle, from the DEP and from the 3
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, that you are for 4
safety. If you are for safety, I'm going to throw a 5
question out. Why is the air space over Oyster Creek 6
not restricted on a sectional in this area? Can 7
anybody answer that?
8 I've asked that at five meetings. I've 9
gone to Congressman Jim Saxton. I've gone to 10 Congressman Chris Smith in the 4th. I have even gone 11 to the FAA, the Federal Aviation Administration, and 12 asked that that space be restricted.
13 UNIDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: Because they 14 don't care about you. Just money.
15 MR. FRYDENDAHL: Not only that, sir --
16 you're right part of the way. The responsibility 17 falls back on AmerGen. They are the owner. They have 18 to go before the FAA, not Ed Frydendahl, and get 19 permission to close that air space off.
20 Now, let me tell you why that's important.
21 UNIDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: Shouldn't that 22 be federal?
23 MR. FRYDENDAHL: Let me tell you why 24 that's important. As a former resident of Lacey 25
95 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Township -- and I don't know if there's anybody here 1
from Lacey -- but I remember years back when a 2
gentleman -- two men went out to Robert J. Miller 3
Airpark, our local airport, took up a small plane and 4
did some flying at low altitudes over Forked River.
5 The steeple on my church, the Forked River 6
United Methodist Church, was crashed into with that 7
plane. What would stop a deranged person -- and this 8
world today certainly has enough of those, we all know 9
-- to go out to Robert J. Miller Airpark and take a 10 test as a pilot, and be certified, and take an 11 airplane and crash it into that corrugated piece of 12 metal on top which surrounds -- the shroud which 13 surrounds the spent fuel pool.
14 This should be done before we even talk 15 about cooling towers or fish kills. This to me is of 16 utmost importance. I don't want to see any more fish 17 kills. I saw enough of them. I saw striped bass 18 three and four feet long when I lived in Lacey 19 floating in that creek because of that plume that 20 comes out of there, that hot water.
21 We were told before by somebody from the 22 plant that they add cool water to it. Again, my 23 question to the people at AmerGen -- four miles out in 24 Barnegat Bay that plume continues to send warm water 25
96 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 out into the bay. You can't tell me that that's not 1
affecting the ecosystem and the environmental 2
condition of Barnegat Bay.
3 And I don't care what kind of an engineer 4
you are, or where you went to school, or what you 5
studied, I'm taking it from a fisherman and an 6
environmentalist who says that warm water should not 7
be shot out there.
8 Is anybody in agreement with me, or am I 9
standing here alone?
10 (Applause.)
11 Another thing that troubles me -- that 12 seriously troubles me, I happen to have a daughter who 13 is a teacher in the Forked River Elementary School, 14 Lacey Township. To evacuate just Lacey Township, and 15 I know we have residents here from Manahawkin, from 16 Barneget Light, from Barnegat, in those areas, let's 17 just talk about Lacey Township.
18 To evacuate every student in the Lacey 19 school system would take 103 school buses, to get them 20 out of there and get them up to Ocean County College 21 or out to the Naval Air Station Lakehurst, or 22 wherever.
23 Lacey Township currently has a fleet of 62 24 buses. So I asked the question at an NRC meeting way 25
97 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 back two or three years ago in Waretown. The answer 1
that I got was, "Well, we'll get back to you, Mr.
2 Frydendahl, and we'll tell you how we're going to 3
supply those extra buses."
4 I
have a
letter from the Nuclear 5
Regulatory Commission that says, "Two will be sent 6
from Pinelands Regional, two will be sent from 7
Southern Regional, one each will be sent from Stafford 8
Township and Eagleswood Township."
9 It doesn't take a brain surgeon or a 10 rocket scientist to realize that to get those buses 11 from that area up to Lacey Township requires either 12 driving north on Route 9 or driving north on the 13 Garden State Parkway. How are you going to get them 14 there? You're not going to.
15 And how are we, just in Lacey Township, 16 going to get our children out of school and out to an 17 area like the Ocean County -- I'm sorry, Ocean County 18 College or the Naval Air Station, or wherever they're 19 going to take them? What are we going to do? We're 20 going to say, "Well, the powerplant is cooking away 21 over there, and it's melting down, and the radiation 22 is going out. Maybe we'll take the little ones first.
23 No, maybe we'll take the high school ones first."
24 We should get an evacuation plan, and I 25
98 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 wish to heck that Senator Connors and Assemblyman 1
Connors and Assemblyman Rumph were here today, because 2
there is an election coming up, and they have been 3
working on this, but they still don't have a solution.
4 I'm going to close now, because I know 5
there's others that want to speak. But everybody 6
yells, "Oh, we've got to have this powerplant. We've 7
got to generate this electricity." Let me give you a 8
fact, folks. On the PJMD, which is the Pennsylvania, 9
Jersey, Maryland, and Delaware grid, Oyster Creek 10 supplies a whopping three percent of the power to that 11 grid.
12 (Applause.)
13 Do we need that? No. Now, I understand 14 it has been recast down to 1-1/2 percent, but I can't 15 say that completely, but the three percent number has 16 now been reduced to 1-1/2 percent. Paula, is that 17 correct? Has that been verified?
18 UNIDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: Ninety-seven 19 percent --
20 FACILITATOR CAMERON: If you want to just 21 finish up with your comment.
22 MR. FRYDENDAHL: So what I'm saying here 23 is I don't want to hear that we've got to have this 24 powerplant, it's safe and it's good and it's producing 25
99 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 a lot of jobs, because the people of Lacey Township 1
are not going to see any difference in their tax 2
structure if that thing closed tomorrow.
3 The reason for that is because the tax law 4
was passed many, many years ago that said if Oyster 5
Creek closes, it does not have an impact on the taxes 6
of Lacey. Let's close it, and let's get it done now.
7 Thank you.
8 (Applause.)
9 FACILITATOR CAMERON:
Okay.
Mr.
10 Frydendahl, usually we don't stop in the middle to 11 take a break to answer questions, but the security 12 issue of -- that you bring up is obviously an 13 extremely important one.
14 We have Mr. Alan Madison here from our 15 staff, who may be able to share some information on 16 the air space issue. So we'll just provide that. If 17 you want to talk more, we can do that with you.
18 But, Alan, can you tell us about the --
19 can you address this? He's with our Nuclear Security 20 and Incident Response staff.
21 MR. MADISON: I'm Alan Madison. I'm Chief 22 of Mitigative Measures and Integrated Response for the 23 NRC in the Office of Nuclear Security and Incident 24 Response.
25
100 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 There is currently a notice to air 1
mariners over all nuclear powerplants that restricts 2
the air space 2,000 feet or lower for any flights, and 3
requires air mariners to not loiter over the nuclear 4
powerplant.
5 We also have engaged right now with the 6
FAA and with NORAD our capabilities to be able to 7
monitor that air space, to monitor the approaches to 8
that air space, and take the appropriate action. I 9
think you had a question at the previous meeting 10 regarding putting a cap or completely closing the air 11 space.
12 First of all, I'm not aware that there is 13 currently a cap over any infrastructure, other than 14 the -- right now the White House and the Congress.
15 There are some restrictions, but a cap requires air 16 cover, requires some airplanes be up there to be able 17 to respond. You know, how large of a cap are you 18 looking for? Well, actually --
19 MR. FRYDENDAHL: It's sectional of the 20 area that you're flying over, sir. If I had a 21 sectional on mid-Florida and it showed Disney World on 22 there, on my sectional map which is a road map of the 23 air --
24 MR. MADISON: Right.
25
101 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MR. FRYDENDAHL: -- it would show that I'm 1
in a restricted area, and I'm not allowed to fly over.
2 MR. MADISON: But it's not a cap. It 3
requires you -- it requires you to not loiter in 4
there.
5 MR. FRYDENDAHL: No, no. It shows you not 6
to fly --
7 MR. MADISON: There are actually flights 8
that occur over that air space every day.
9 MR. FRYDENDAHL: As long as they over 10 30,000 feet.
11 MR. MADISON: Correct. And that's why 12 there's a restriction. There's a similar restriction 13 over nuclear powerplants, and it's at a lower altitude 14 because of the air space that a lot of them are in.
15 We have looked at this at the Federal Government 16 level. We continue to look at this, whether or not to 17 put -- to put more restrictions on that air space.
18 Part of the concern is, obviously, how 19 large of a restriction do you want to put in, and what 20 are the impacts of that restriction.
21 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thank you 22 for --
23 MR. MADISON: We can go a lot further, but 24 there are -- we continue to discuss it. We continue 25
102 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 to look at it. Currently, we get daily reports from 1
what the air traffic is in the area. We are -- NORAD 2
is capable of responding within moments to interdict 3
any aircraft that would -- that we think is 4
appropriate to interdict.
5 And we've had some instances where we've 6
actually been prepared to take that action. They have 7
turned out to be benign. There has been some problems 8
potentially with the -- an individual may be sending 9
-- our transponder may be sending out a hijack signal 10 when there's no real hijack, that type of thing.
11 But the actions -- we're prepared to take 12 those actions, and we'll continue to look at it.
13 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thanks, Alan.
14 MR. FRYDENDAHL: Thank you, sir. I'm glad 15 it's being looked at.
16 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Thank you, Mr.
17 Frydendahl.
18 We're going to go to Mr. Gerrity, Chip 19 Gerrity, and then to Mr. Don Williams.
20 Mr. Gerrity?
21 MR. GERRITY: Good afternoon. My name is 22 Chip Gerrity. I'm President of the New Jersey IBEW 23 and represent over 35,000 IBEW members in New Jersey, 24 and I'm here on behalf of the tens of thousands of 25
103 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 working men and women in this region. And I'm also 1
President of IBEW Local 94, which represents the 2
workers at Salem and Hope Creek Generating Station.
3 I'm going to just deviate a little bit 4
from what I have. I've worked at Salem and Hope Creek 5
for over 16 years. I was a welder in the plant, and 6
I have firsthand sight of watching the NRC do its job 7
and INPO, Institute of Nuclear Power Operations, two 8
groups that watch the plant, make sure it operates the 9
way it's supposed to, and makes sure the workers do 10 what is supposed to be done.
11 I can tell you as a worker that I wasn't 12 happy with what happened at Davis-Besse, and I expect, 13 you know, as a worker, again, for the NRC to do its 14 job and fix the problems that happened at Davis-Besse.
15 And as far as the relicensing, I know that the people 16 that are inspectors in the NRC, I have a great deal of 17 respect for. I think they are licensed. Congress is 18 supposed to watch them, to watch them do the 19 relicensing effort, make sure the plant is safe.
20 I can tell you that the workers do not 21 want an unsafe plant to work in. So our position --
22 New Jersey IBEW -- and me and President of Local 94 is 23 that we want a safe plant to work in. I think the NRC 24 should have the ability to do its job in its entirety 25
104 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 and make sure that we have a safe plant when it's 1
relicensed, and we support the relicensing overall.
2 Thank you.
3 (Applause.)
4 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thank you, 5
Mr. Gerrity.
6 Mr. Williams? It says here Mr. Don 7
Williams, and then we're going to go to Mr. Mercurio.
8 MR. WILLIAMS: Hello. My name is Don 9
Williams. I didn't know I was going to be here today.
10 I just realized that this meeting was taking place 11 today. Nobody asked me to come. I'm not a big shot.
12 I don't have a bachelor's degree or anything like 13 that.
14 I've lived at 122 Ditmar Drive for the 15 last -- in South Toms River for the last 21 years, and 16 last year a strange thing happened to me. I was given 17 the opportunity to work at Oyster Creek during a 18 shutdown. Well, I was really nervous about that. I 19 thought, oh, what have I put myself in for? Am I 20 doing the right thing? Is it going to be safe? I had 21 no idea, because, like you, I had a lot of concerns.
22 Well, let me tell you, I worked at the 23 plant from October 24th to November 25th, and I 24 learned a lot. One thing I know for a fact, that 25
105 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 plant is safer than Fort Knox. It's very well 1
protected. And during the shutdown they went through 2
-- a lot of money was spent to repair, replace, and 3
refurbish parts that needed to be refurnished, like 4
the turbine.
5 The turbine has a building called the 6
turbine building, which I know now. The turbine is 7
bigger than this whole room. Well, I saw that turbine 8
taken apart and replaced and rebuilt from scratch, and 9
they did an excellent job.
10 And you know what? I'm not worried about 11 Oyster Creek anymore. I sleep very well. I tell all 12 my friends and everybody I know, "You don't have to 13 worry about Oyster Creek. It's safe." And anybody 14 that's coming up with these cockeyed stories about, 15 oh, they need water towers, no, they don't need water 16 towers. The system they have is fine. The water 17 flows in, and it flows out, and they do a good job.
18 And I'd like to say thank-you very much 19 for having me here. Thank you.
20 (Applause.)
21 FACILITATOR CAMERON: We're going to go to 22 Mr. Mercurio, and then to Mike Ford, and then we have 23 four or five others to go to to finish up. This is 24 Mr. Michael Mercurio. Is that correct?
25
106 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MR. MERCURIO: Thank you very much for 1
this opportunity to speak. I live in Long Beach 2
Island. I am an environmental advocate. I believe 3
that nuclear power, if done responsibly, if we can 4
address the issues of nuclear power, what the problems 5
are, from something that was designed 40 years and 6
correct those
- problems, it's a
- viable, safe 7
alternative energy.
8 Our number one problem is not radiation 9
from the atomic powerplant. It's how to get rid of --
10 we have to get the Federal Government to start moving 11 on disposal of the fuel rods. That is a major 12 priority that's the Federal Government's 13 responsibility that they should take on, not these 14 people.
15 The other thing that should be addressed 16 is the fact that the coolant -- the cooling of the 17 water into Barnegat Bay can be very easily solved as 18 heat recovery systems can be put in along the area, 19 hydroponics, different areas. Forty years ago, we had 20 a system -- we had a bay that was full of life. Today 21 it's -- our oceans are 90 percent depleted.
22 But just to get off it, I am for it 23 because of the simple reason that carbon emissions 24 present more of a threat to human life on this planet 25
107 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 right now, because of the fact of the amount that 1
we're putting in. The United States puts 2.5 billion 2
tons of carbon just from electric power generation 3
through coal-fired plants.
4 So if you really want to point a finger at 5
what's causing environmental impacts, it's pointed to 6
the coal industry, not to the nuclear regulatory area.
7 It's six generations, I think we have now, have been 8
designed at nuclear plants that are safer. We just 9
need to address the issues that are of concern for a 10 40-year plant and correct them. And I'm for 11 recommissioning it if those problems can be corrected.
12 Thank you.
13 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Thank you, Mr.
14 Mercurio.
15 Mr. Ford? And then we're going to go to 16 Nancy Eriksen. Is Mr. Ford still here? Okay. Nancy?
17 Nancy Eriksen.
18 MS. ERIKSEN: Hi. I'm Nancy Eriksen. Can 19 you hear me in the back?
20 UNIDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: No.
21 UNIDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: No.
22 MS. ERIKSEN: I don't think it's working.
23 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Try it again.
24 MS. ERIKSEN: Hello?
25
108 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 FACILITATOR CAMERON: No? Okay. Let's go 1
with -- okay. Why don't you just use this.
2 MS. ERIKSEN: Okay. I've worked at Oyster 3
Creek for 24 years. I've lived in Forked River for 21 4
years, close to the plant. I've been a resident of 5
Ocean County for over 30 years. I'm also President of 6
the Natural Resource Education Foundation in Ocean 7
Township, and its mission is to educate the public, 8
including all of the school children of Ocean County, 9
about the environment.
10 I'm also past president of Ocean Nature 11 Conservation Society. I'm a card-carrying member of 12 the New Jersey Audubon and Cape May Bird Observatory.
13 So I am an environmentalist, and I do work at the 14 nuclear powerplant.
15 Oyster Creek has donated thousands of 16 dollars to the New Jersey Audubon, as Bud Swenson has 17 already said. We've also donated land from our 18 Finninger Farm property across the street from the 19 powerplant to Lacey Township for preservation.
20 Oyster Creek also supports me and two 21 other members to be on the World Series of Birding 22 every year, which is quite expensive. It's $2,000 23 just to sponsor us to go out and bird, and find all 24 the endangered and threatened species around Ocean 25
109 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 County and the State of New Jersey.
1 We also do bird surveys, and we do mammal 2
surveys out at Oyster Creek. That information is 3
given to the DEP, and it's compiled, and we work with 4
the DEP if we need to.
5 We also sponsor bluebird trails.
6 Bluebirds are no longer threatened, but they were at 7
one time, so 10 years ago we put up a bluebird trail 8
and we monitor that to make sure that we were able to 9
bring that population back, which we did, not 10 singlehandedly but we had Ocean County put up bluebird 11 trails. We have wood duck trails, and we have a 12 peregrine falcon tower at the plant.
13 In addition, we host various environmental 14 meetings at the power plant, and we give people tours.
15 So I invite you to sign up for a tour. If you're 16 afraid of the plant, if you're afraid of spent fuel, 17 if you don't understand what has been said here today, 18 or at other meetings, come and take a tour. If you 19 live in Forked River, you're right across the way, a 20 couple of miles away. Schedule to take a tour and see 21 how clean it is, see how environmentally friendly we 22 are.
23 If there's a problem with an endangered 24 species, for example, or a threatened species, such as 25
110 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 an osprey or -- we get seals, we get all kinds of 1
terrapins, we stop work and take care of that animal, 2
whether it's calling other regulatory agencies, if 3
it's calling the DEP to come in and help us, that's 4
what we do.
5 Oyster Creek is very concerned about the 6
environment and is a steward of the environment.
7 In closing, I'll just say that it's clean, 8
safe, and reliable. And, again, I invite you to come 9
and take a tour.
10 (Applause.)
11 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Thank you very much, 12 Nancy.
13 Paula?
14 Is there someone here named Simonair?
15 There was one card that I could not read the signature 16 on. Well, I'll tell you what, we're going to go 17 through -- we have three speakers left that I can 18 decipher, and after we're through with those we'll see 19 if -- if you signed up and you haven't been called, 20 let me know.
21 So we're going to go to Paula Gotsch, then 22 Suzanne Leta -- Suzanne is back there -- and then to 23 Kelly McNicholas from the Sierra Club.
24 So do we have -- is Paula here? Oh, 25
111 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Paula, I'm sorry. Do you want to come up and speak?
1 And I guess then, until we fix this problem, we'll use 2
this.
3 MS. GOTSCH: My name is Paula Gotsch. Can 4
you hear me back there?
5 UNIDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: Yes.
6 MS. GOTSCH: Okay. I'm a spokesperson for 7
Grandmothers and Mothers for Energy Safety. Our 8
biggest concern right now is that the NRC refuses to 9
look at the solid waste problem and the evacuation 10 problem as a legitimate concern within the scoping 11 process.
12 They keep saying that that's an everyday 13 issue. We say that's an everyday issue that every day 14 they don't take care of. So, therefore, it's a now 15 issue, yes, but it's an ongoing issue that isn't being 16 taken care of.
17 In terms of the nuclear waste, if anything 18 should be considered in an environmental scoping 19 meeting, it's that waste that is not being disposed 20 of, that is dangerous as it sits there now. Even 21 going to the casks, the cement casks, no one really 22 knows how those will hold up. There is talk that 300 23 years they will probably start leaking.
24 In terms of Yucca Mountain, even if they 25
112 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 ever do open that up, which it looks like they won't, 1
there will be so much nuclear waste at all of the 2
plants that we don't even know if ours will get there.
3 A nuclear waste dump in New Jersey, which is what 4
we're talking about, is what will happen -- it is that 5
way now, and it will continue to get worse the more we 6
make.
7 How can an industry claim to be moral and 8
community-oriented when they produce a
deadly 9
substance where there is no known disposal for 10 anywhere on this earth? No one can find it.
11 (Applause.)
12 Somebody asked the reason that Germany is 13 getting off nuclear, or wants to get off nuclear, as 14 the U.K. would like to, too, since they had that 15 terrible accident at the nuclear processing plant.
16 The reason they're getting off it is because there is 17 no place to dispose of this stuff. They are finding 18 out that renewable energy is getting cheaper and 19 cheaper, when you consider the billions of dollars 20 that go into subsidizing the nuclear energy field.
21 And stop -- it is disingenuous for nuclear 22 people to keep comparing the CO2 that comes from coal, 23 as if that was the option we're all headed for. And 24 in terms of the CO2, they are saying that now nuclear 25
113 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 is so -- you know, that it's going to make our air in 1
New Jersey better, and I said this at another meeting 2
-- there are three of the worst coal producers --
3 coal-fed plants in the Midwest that have no safety 4
equipment on them whatsoever in terms of getting the 5
CO2 out of their refuse there, that go to serve the 6
uranium processing people.
7 So that -- and that CO2 comes from Ohio 8
and Kentucky, and wherever those plants are, right 9
into New Jersey. So we don't need to keep saying that 10 nuclear energy does not produce CO2, because that's 11 disingenuous.
12 All right. I'll stop there. Thank you.
13 (Applause.)
14 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Thank you, 15 Paula.
16 We're going to hear from Suzanne Leta now, 17 and then Kelly McNicholas, and I think we've found our 18 mystery person.
19 (Laughter.)
20 But that'll be for later.
21 This is Suzanne. Leeta (phonetic),
22 Suzanne Leta. Sorry, Suzanne. Oh, here.
23 MS. LETA: Hi. My name is Suzanne Leta.
24 I work with New Jersey PIRG, New Jersey Public 25
114 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Interest Research Group. I work in Trenton. We're at 1
11 North Willow Street in Trenton, New Jersey, and we 2
represent over 25,000 citizen members here in the 3
state.
4 And we -- we're public interest advocates, 5
so that means that we work to protect the environment.
6 We work to protect consumers, and we work to promote 7
good government here in the state.
8 And I want to take just a minute to -- you 9
know, to talk specifically about what's happening with 10 Oyster Creek's water intake and discharge, because I 11 think that that's a big part of the environmental 12 scoping process. I have a few questions about that.
13 I know that DEP has jurisdiction over 14 their water discharge permit, and I don't know --
15 actually, I'd like to ask how much jurisdiction the 16 NRC has over that, and whether you actually look at 17 whether Oyster Creek is complying with the Clean Water 18 Act, or if that is simply a matter for the DEP to 19 consider, because it's unclear to me what is the truth 20 in that. I mean, I know the DEP does, but I don't 21 know what the NRC's role is in that.
22 So just to be clear in terms of Oyster 23 Creek's water impact into the local waterways, and to 24 Barnegat Bay, that since Oyster Creek was built in 25
115 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 1969, the plant's operation has really resulted in 1
very far-reaching and long-lasting environmental 2
degradation to nearby waterways, including Forked 3
River, Oyster Creek, and Barnegat Bay.
4 And, unfortunately, as it stands right 5
now, the DEP's draft water permit does let the plant 6
off the hook, and I would hope that the NRC would not 7
do the same, if you do have jurisdiction, any type of 8
jurisdiction over this.
9 You know, the once-through cooling system 10 that was designed in the 1960s simply isn't sufficient 11 to fix the problems that have been going on for so 12 long in terms of intake and water discharge. You 13 know, to describe -- I don't know if anyone has done 14 this yet, so I'm going to do this -- I hopefully am 15 not repeating what someone else has already said. But 16 for the public's knowledge, I want to describe how the 17 system works.
18 Essentially, the heated water -- excuse 19 me, the -- first, the system intakes water from Forked 20 River to cool the reactor, and then the heated water, 21 which is then called thermal pollution, is then 22 discharged into Oyster Creek. And the plant actually 23 intakes and discharges over 1.4 billion gallons of 24 water every day.
25
116 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 The water is taken in at a speed of about 1
1-to 2,000 cubic feet per second. That's actually 2
the force of a medium-sized river. The chlorine 3
levels in the water are also about 20 times the lethal 4
level of many different types of aquatic life.
5 And there are grates over the intake 6
system, but because the water is flushed in at such a 7
high speed, it creates a very -- it's kind of like a 8
giant sucking action, and that brings in an assortment 9
of aquatic life. Some of it is small, some of it is 10 larvae that flows right through the grate, and it's 11 killed in the process of cooling the reactor. And 12 that effect is called entrainment.
13 And then, larger types of aquatic life --
14 and those include sea bass, they include white perch, 15 they also include endangered sea turtles. Although 16 it's great to hear that you're looking at birds, 17 that's an endangered species that, unfortunately, you 18 do not address.
19 Those creatures actually get pinned on the 20 grate and often die from it and/or seriously injured, 21 and that lethal effect is called impingement. So you 22 have entrainment, where water is going through the 23 system, and then you have impingement, when aquatic 24 life is being impinged upon the grate.
25
117 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 So in addition to that, Oyster Creek's 1
daily thorough pollution discharge often spreads a 2
thermal flume, and that can be over a distance of four 3
miles across the bay. It's actually the entire width 4
of the bay.
5 It creates a fry zone for young larvae, 6
and the NRC has actually done studies and indicate 7
that the thermal flume has increased the population of 8
the tropical wood boring species that, you know, serve 9
kind of as aquatic termites in the area.
10 So, you know, all of these problems 11 associated with Oyster Creek's water intake and 12 discharge system actually put it in violation of the 13 Clean Water Act, because that specific Act requires 14 the plant to install modern technology that actually 15 fixes the problem, and, fortunately for us, that 16 technology is available.
17 That technology is called a closed-cycle 18 cooling system. There are different types of these 19 types of systems. Oyster Creek will talk about how, 20 you know, it will have more environmental problems 21 than without it, but the reality is that we know --
22 and the DEP has stated this several times -- that, in 23 fact, it won't result in any kind of environmental 24 problems.
25
118 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 In fact, it will really fix the root cause 1
of the problem, because it actually reduces the amount 2
of water going into a system and being discharged out 3
to the system by over 95 percent. And that's actually 4
the way to solve that particular problem involved with 5
Oyster Creek's environmental record.
6 So we know, again, that reduces the 7
discharge and intake by over 95 percent, and that 8
actually would save over 13 million fish and shellfish 9
annually, and an estimated tens of millions of 10 additional larvae annually.
11 Unfortunately, the DEP permit right now, 12 it doesn't require the plant to install a closed-cycle 13 cooling system only. Unfortunately, it gives Oyster 14 Creek the option of restoration. If you're going to 15 use restoration, you should use it as a penalty for 16 violating the Clean Water Act for the past 35 years.
17 You should not use it as an alternative to modern 18 technology. That can actually solve the root cause of 19 the problem.
20 And I would hope that the consideration of 21 this particular issue, and of a closed-cycle cooling 22 system, would be part of the NRC's environmental 23 scoping record, and actually would look at the DEP's 24 best professional judgment, which is stated, although 25
119 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 it -- although it allows for restoration, if you take 1
a look at that permit, it says specifically that 2
closed-cycle cooling will actually fix the problem.
3 So that's the first thing I wanted to 4
state on the record.
5 I can talk -- I've talked before about 6
Oyster Creek's other environmental problems. I can 7
talk about waste, I can talk about evacuation, I can 8
talk about spent fuel and security issues. I really 9
-- I think there are clear problems involved with the 10 way that the NRC looks at license extensions, and, 11 number one, they don't take a look at waste. You 12 think of it as an ongoing issue.
13 But there's going to be 20 more years of 14 it. And looking that far into the future, 15 unfortunately, is not part of that process. The same 16 thing with evacuation plans. Yes, I understand that 17 they're reviewed annually. They're not reviewed as to 18 what the population is going to look like 20 years 19 down the line.
20 So, you know, I know that's not part of 21 this review. We'll be talking about it in other 22 reviews. But I do think that considering the public 23 health risk that you have, if you do have a problem 24 with that plant, that is an environmental problem 25
120 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 overall.
1 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Suzanne, I'm going 2
to have to ask you to summarize.
3 MS. LETA: Sure. No problem. Yes. So, 4
you know, I guess my final question to you is, I know 5
that there is some type of -- I think it's called a 6
severe accident mitigation within the environmental 7
review.
8 So I guess my final question to you -- I 9
have two questions. The first is about what level of 10 jurisdiction the plant -- the NRC has over the plant's 11 water permit, if any. And, number two, how does that 12 accident mitigation -- how that play into the 13 environmental scoping process?
14 Thanks.
15 (Applause.)
16 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Suzanne, thank you 17 very much.
18 Let's go to Kelly. Kelly McNicholas?
19 MS. McNICHOLAS: Hello. Good afternoon.
20 My name is Kelly McNicholas. I'm the Conservation 21 Coordinator for the New Jersey Chapter of the Sierra 22 Club. I'm here representing our 23,000 members in the 23 states.
24 I also say with fair confidence that the 25
121 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Sierra Club, the nation's oldest environmental 1
organization, is the stewards of the environment, and 2
that Exelon is not in this situation.
3 (Applause.)
4 We are actively opposing the relicensing 5
of the plant to extend past 2009. As a club, 6
nationally, we are opposing the siting of any new 7
nuclear power plants. We believe for the purpose of 8
the environmental review, I understand that it is to 9
determine whether or not the adverse environmental 10 impacts of the license renewal for Oyster Creek are so 11 great that preserving the option of license renewal 12 for energy planning decisionmakers would be 13 unreasonable.
14 Well, to start with what the energy 15 production is for our State, it is unreasonable for us 16 to extend the license of this plant, when we're 17 getting a mere 1.5 percent of our energy on the grid 18 for it. New Jersey, along with other states, are 19 adopting renewable energy measures, as well as 20 efficiency measures, that are going to reduce the need 21 of the power production currently made by the plants.
22 Additionally, there are several 23 environmental aspects of this plant, as Suzanne Leta 24 went in, about the cooling towers. We also support 25
122 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 only the option of installing cooling towers at this 1
plant, and oppose the mitigation factor of wetlands 2
restoration. Tourism is the third largest industry in 3
the State of New Jersey, and Barnegat Bay heavily 4
contributes to that.
5 We need to be looking at what those 6
factors are in determining what the harm is on 7
Barnegat Bay by this plant, and how that's negatively 8
impacting not just the environment but also the 9
economy of the State of New Jersey in terms of the 10 degradation that this plant causes to that important 11 estuary.
12 Additionally, we know that the design and 13 age deficiencies of Oyster Creek are well documented, 14 and that 30 percent of the power -- of the plant 15 equipment failures are due to age-related degradation.
16 We also know that design standards have changed 17 dramatically since the plant was built, and that in 18 1985 studies have shown that the MARK I reactor is a 19 faulty design, and that there could be a 90 percent 20 failure rate in the case of an accident.
21 This would require the venting of pressure 22
-- pressure buildup to avoid a meltdown of the core.
23 If that response and the release of high pressure 24 radioactive steam into our environment is not an 25
123 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 environmental issue, and is not considered part of 1
this review, I don't know what is, because I can tell 2
you the first thing that people will be concerned 3
about --
4 (Applause.)
5
-- if something like that were to happen 6
would be directly their health and how directly the 7
environmental health of their families is impacted by 8
this plant.
9 Related to that, we know that in the case 10 of any major nuclear accident, it could take one to 11 four hours for flumes to travel within the 10-mile 12 radius. However, the evacuation plan could take seven 13 to nine at minimum. If that is not an environmental 14 issue in terms of reducing what our exposure is to 15 radioactivity, then I don't know what is.
16 Again, we oppose the continued extension 17 of this license beyond 2009. I think that the 18 environmental review needs to take things into account 19 as to whether other federal regulations and laws are 20 being followed. How is it that the plant can violate 21 the Clean Water Act, yet another federal agency will 22 approve the continued operation? I don't understand 23 how that works.
24 So, in conclusion, thank you for the 25
124 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 opportunity. I hope this takes a full environmental 1
review. I am sorry I missed your presentation and 2
look forward to hearing more than that.
3 But this needs to be broader than just 4
whether fish die, which is something we clearly are 5
concerned about.
It needs to look at the 6
environmental health of people who are affected in the 7
communities as well.
8 (Applause.)
9 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Thank you very much.
10 We have three speakers left. And one I 11 couldn't decipher is Mr. Simonair, Mr. Joe Simonair, 12 and we're going to go to him next for his comments, 13 and then we're going to go to Chris Tryon, and then to 14 Mr. Jay Vouglitois. Okay?
15 All right. So we're going to go to you, 16 Mr. Simonair. All right?
17 MR. SIMONAIR: Yes.
18 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. And let's see 19 if we can hear Mr. Simonair through this microphone.
20 MR. SIMONAIR: I hope so. For one thing, 21 the reactor should be shut down. If it's so safe, why 22 would they have evacuation plans to begin with? And 23 when they get to Yucca Mountain, they put the high, 24 long-lived radiation, they put that in Yucca Mountain 25
125 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 in carbon steel -- in tanks that last 10,000 years, 1
they say. And then, they say it could deteriorate in 2
300 years, and it doesn't go away.
3 So you keep on putting more fuel rods 4
there, more radiation. Where are you going to put it?
5 As soon as they go there, if they go there -- they 6
probably will -- they have to already make a --
7 already did make plans with the Indian reservations 8
there to put it in the land there. Radiation doesn't 9
go away. It decays. It has to decay to go away into 10 another element, and some of that could be short-11 lived, some of that could be billions of years. And 12 you're going to be sick, and your children are going 13 to be sick.
14 And then, what about terrorism? They 15 don't have to fly an airplane, not with the weapons 16 and the technology we've got today. And what about 17 the fuel rods? They could fool with the fuel rod and 18 put enriched uranium slugs in there, and you could 19 have a nuclear explosion, which probably that's 20 unlikely because it would be pretty hard to do. But, 21 you know, these people are pretty tricky. They could 22 do it.
23 Now, we get to this person that was 24 talking about the reactor. It's clean, it's safe, but 25
126 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 no carbon. But you've got three percent energy and 90 1
percent waste, nuclear waste, which is worse. What 2
they should be doing is cutting down on some of the --
3 you know, some of the energy we use.
4 Did you ever hear of plow-sharing? Plow-5 sharing is -- this was back some years, but they still 6
do it to a point. They used -- if you know anything 7
about the Hiroshima bomb, a megaton is a million -- 77 8
Hiroshima bombs, a million tons of TNT, metric tons of 9
TNT.
10 They cut it down to -- from a megaton to 11 150 kilotons. That's like -- a megaton is 77 12 Hiroshima bombs, and a kiloton is 1,000 metric tons of 13 TNT. So you add that up and explode that underground 14 for mining. They dig down about a mile, and then they 15 ignite these devices, and they explode for mining.
16 They get uranium, they get copper, but 17 when they get cooper they pour chemicals in there to 18 loosen it up somehow, and it gets in the water table.
19 There's thousands of people that -- I've been looking 20 into this since the Hanford atomic -- when the 21 reactors first started, when they were first -- built 22 the first atomic bomb. And a lot of coverups --
23 everything is safe. They told the people in the 24 towns, "It's safe, it's safe."
25
127 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Women were coming down with breast cancer, 1
miscarriages. Everybody was getting cancer. It was 2
in the water. If my memory is right, in Idaho -- I 3
just read this a while ago. I believe it's Idaho --
4 I might be wrong about that, but I got the information 5
home -- 97 million tons of radium -- radioactive 6
radium were dumped on the shore and in the water 7
there.
8 Okay? You think you're safe? Nuclear 9
belongs in a star. We shouldn't be using nuclear at 10 all.
11 Now, windmills -- I've got it right here, 12 too. It's been 30 years since we've had a nuclear 13 reactor in this country, because they're so dangerous 14 and people were scared. Thirty years. Our new 15 leadership gets in there, all business, going to have 16 reactors all over the world.
17 Big mining countries, mining industries, 18 you know, the big uranium, copper, and all types of 19 things, they're going to use these nuclear devices.
20 Yucca Mountain is on a fault. What 21 happens if there's an earthquake there? You've got 22
--Europe, they talked about that, they're closing them 23 down. United Kingdom, they're closing older reactors 24 down, but they're not too -- they're going to build 25
128 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 one. And one in Ganola, reactors in Nufiana --
1 however you say that name -- was another reactor shut 2
down for good in 2004, with the second of the 3
Chernobyl style to be closed in 2009.
4 I know that Japan is having a nightmare 5
with their reactors. So many people are being killed 6
that were working there, and thousands were killed 7
from downwind from the radiation. Thousands. Like 8
what would happen here if a container broke loose and 9
you got radiation.
10 There's no escape. People have got to 11 understand that. There's no escape. This is life-12 threatening. This is your life. This is the future 13 gone down the drain, and it could happen anytime.
14 Even the best conditions, that gentleman before that 15 was up there, he said, well -- what did he say? He 16 said it was safe. He said just CO2 gets out.
17 Damage from radiation accumulates over 18 time, because once it's in the body it stays there.
19 Cancer is promised.
20 Dr. John Goffman, a medical doctor and 21 nuclear chemist, biophysicist, Arthur Templin, charged 22 that using nuclear is risking dangerous levels of 23 radioactivity. He said it's genocide, and genocide 24 could be right around the corner for us.
25
129 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Mr. Simonair, I want 1
to thank you.
2 MR. SIMONAIR: Okay. I had more, but, you 3
know --
4 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Thank you.
5 MR. SIMONAIR: -- I've got to be a 6
gentleman.
7 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Thank you. You are.
8 You certainly are. Thank you very much.
9 (Applause.)
10 And we have two speakers?
11 MR. SIMONAIR: I've got tons more.
12 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Chris Tryon? And 13 then Jay Vouglitois, and then we have some information 14 for you that we promised we'd get.
15 MS. TRYON: All right. I am not any kind 16 of an expert. I'm just somebody who has lived in 17 Bayville for over 30 years, and I come to these 18 hearings and I learn a lot. It makes me very nervous 19 what I learn, but I learn.
20 My common sense tells me that the older 21 things get, the more likely they are to break. This 22 applies to my refrigerator, my hot water heater, my 23 car, and Oyster Creek nuclear powerplant. That plant 24 is the oldest plant in the country.
25
130 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Its continued operation for another 20 1
years is an experiment. It has never been done 2
before. An experiment. And guess who the guinea pigs 3
are? All of us who live in Ocean County, and I'm not 4
comfortable with that.
5 That nuclear power -- any nuclear power is 6
outdated technology. It's finished. Wind and solar 7
are the new modern technologies. They are clean, they 8
are safe, they are not going to hurt us, even if 9
something goes wrong.
10 The plant has lived out its 40-year life 11 span. Now is the time to let it die.
12 (Applause.)
13 There are too many problems with the 14 plant, too many problems -- obsolete, unsafe design.
15 Radiation leakage, even a small amount, accumulates in 16 your body. Environmental problems, nuclear waste 17 accumulation, for which there is no solution at all, 18 impossible, laughable evacuation plan.
19 AmerGen is a private corporation. They 20 care more for the bottom line, their profit, their 21 corporation, than they do for our safety. And it's 22 extremely revealing that the people here who have 23 spoken in favor of the plant work there. They have a 24 financial incentive to have the plant continue to 25
131 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 operate.
1 My heart goes out to you, but I will not 2
feel safe until that plant is closed.
3 Thank you.
4 (Applause.)
5 FACILITATOR CAMERON:
Jay?
Jay 6
Vouglitois, and then I'm going to ask Rani to give us 7
some information and close out the meeting for us.
8 Jay?
9 MR. VOUGLITOIS: Good evening. My name is 10 Jay Vouglitois. I'm a former employee of the Oyster 11 Creek powerplant. I was privileged to serve as an 12 environmental scientist and as the manager of 13 environmental affairs at Oyster Creek for some 27 14 years.
15 I heard a couple of statements made 16 tonight that I feel obligated to correct. One is that 17 Oyster Creek is in violation of the Clean Water Act.
18 That is simply not true. Oyster Creek could not 19 operate today if it was in violation of the Clean 20 Water Act.
21 Oyster Creek currently operates a New 22 Jersey Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit 23 that was issued by the New Jersey Department of 24 Environmental Protection. That would not be possible 25
132 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 if they were in violation of the Clean Water Act.
1 That is a false statement.
2 Secondly, I heard someone say that there 3
are far-reaching and long-lasting environmental 4
degradation occurring due to the operation of the 5
existing once-through cooling system.
6
- Well, there was a
very thorough 7
independent evaluation of this once-through cooling 8
system that was done prior to the issuance of the 9
permit that I referred to a second ago. The permit 10 was issued in 1994. Before issuing the permit, the 11 DEP hired an independent consultant called VERSAR to 12 evaluate all of the studies, and there were some 20 13 years of intensive studies that were done on the 14 cooling system at Oyster Creek. I know because I 15 participated in many of them.
16 If I wasn't actually doing the work, I 17 participated in the design of the studies. I oversaw 18 the hiring of the consultants. I looked over those --
19 their shoulders as they did the work. I'm very 20 familiar with this work. But it's not my opinion 21 that's important. It's the opinion of the independent 22 expert that was hired by the New Jersey Department of 23 Environmental Protection prior to the issuance of the 24 current permit.
25
133 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 That independent consultant -- VERSAR --
1 was asked to determine if the existing once-through 2
cooling system complied with Sections 316(a) and (b) 3 of the Clean Water Act. Based upon the results of 4
their review, VERSAR and the NJDEP, in the permit that 5
they issue, concluded that the continued operation of 6
the Oyster Creek nuclear generating station at the 7
estimated levels of losses to representative important 8
species populations -- and these are the losses due to 9
the impingement and entrainment that you heard people 10 talk about.
11 Continued operation at those levels of 12 losses, without modification to the intake structures 13 and/or operating practices
- again, without 14 modification to the intake structure, does not 15 threaten the protection and propagation of balanced 16 indigenous populations in Barnegat Bay. That's a 17 direct quote from the DEP's independent consultant.
18 It's not opinion. It's not AmerGen or Exelon's 19 opinion.
20 It's worth noting that VERSAR, the 21 consultant that the DEP hired, was not shy about 22 asking to have powerplants modify their cooling water 23 intakes.
24 As a matter of fact, a few months before 25
134 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 they initiated the evaluation of Oyster Creek, they 1
finished one up on the Salem nuclear generating 2
station. And based upon the results of their 3
evaluation of that cooling system, they called for a 4
50 percent reduction in cooling water flow, which is 5
essentially calling for backfitting, closed-cycle 6
cooling.
7 So they weren't afraid to say that Oyster 8
Creek needed to modify their cooling system. But, in 9
fact, they determined the opposite -- that it didn't 10 need to be modified. A couple of the other 11 conclusions that they and the DEP came to, that I'd 12 like to share with you, that are contrary to some of 13 the assertions that were made tonight, include -- and 14 these are direct quotes. "The losses due to 15 impingement at the Oyster Creek nuclear generating 16 station were of no consequence to the compliance 17 determination." Losses due to impingement of no 18 consequence to the compliance determination.
19 This charge affects, contrary to the fact 20 that you heard that there is a thermal plume that goes 21 all the way across the bay, causing all kinds of 22 havoc, the DEP's independent consultant concluded, I 23 quote, "This charge affects are small and localized, 24 and have no adverse consequences to Barnegat Bay."
25
135 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 They go on to conclude, I quote, "Based on 1
findings summarized in this report, balance indigenous 2
populations of Barnegat Bay are protected under Oyster 3
Creek's current operations."
4 I quote, "Plant-related losses at the 5
Oyster Creek nuclear generating station do not 6
adversely impact spawning and nursery functions."
7 I quote, "Plant-related losses at the 8
Oyster Creek nuclear generating station do not 9
adversely affect the estuarian food web of Barnegat 10 Bay."
11 I quote, "Plant-related losses at the 12 Oyster Creek nuclear generating station do not 13 adversely impact the beneficial uses of Barnegat Bay."
14 This is contrary to the comment that I 15 heard a few minutes ago that the alleged degradation 16 of the bay is having a negative impact on the economy.
17 These are not my conclusions. These are 18 the conclusions of an independent expert hired by the 19 Department of Environmental Protection.
20 Thank you very much for the opportunity to 21 comment.
22 (Applause.)
23 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Thank you. Thank 24 you, Jay.
25
136 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 I'm going to ask Rani Franovich to close 1
the meeting out for us. She does have some 2
information on the spent fuel issue that was talked 3
about, and we did that pass that information on to the 4
couple --
5 MS. FRANOVICH: Yes.
6 FACILITATOR CAMERON: -- who had to leave 7
early. I just want to remind Ron Bellamy and Mark 8
Ferdas, our resident inspector, to talk to Mr. Warren 9
about the overpressurization in the water issue after 10 the meeting.
11 Rani?
12 MS. FRANOVICH: I need your mike. Can you 13 guys hear me now?
14 UNIDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: Yes.
15 MS. FRANOVICH: Is this better? Okay.
16 There was a question earlier today about the number of 17 spent fuel rods or spent fuel assemblies at the Oyster 18 Creek site, stored at the site. And Mr. Pete Ressler 19 of the Communications Department, with I believe it's 20 AmerGen -- it could be Entergy -- Exelon, I'm sorry --
21 indicated that there are 976 bundles in dry storage at 22 the site, and 2,400 -- approximately 2,400 bundles in 23 the pool, the spent fuel pool.
24 UNIDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: 36. 36, I 25
137 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 believe.
1 MS. FRANOVICH: I think there are a lot 2
more than 36.
3 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Okay. Just keep 4
going, Rani. Close this out.
5 MS. FRANOVICH: 180 bundles are discharged 6
every other year. They're on a 24-month refueling 7
cycle, so every 24 months they discharge about 180 8
fuel bundles to the pool. Each bundle weighs 9
approximately 600 pounds, and of that weight about 500 10 pounds is actual uranium fuel.
11 Okay. I'd like to thank everyone for 12 coming out again today. Your participation in this 13 meeting is an important part of our process. One of 14 the items you were handed when you came to the 15 meeting, as you entered the room, was a feedback form 16 for the NRC's public meeting.
17 If you have any suggestions on how we can 18 improve our meeting, please fill out the form.
19 Postage is prepaid. You can send it in to the NRC.
20 If you have any comments on the scope of 21 the environmental impact statement that you think of 22 after the meeting, we're accepting these comments 23 through November 14, 2005, and, again, Dr. Michael 24 Masnik is the point of contact for those comments.
25
138 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Finally, the NRC staff and contractors 1
will be staying for a few minutes after this meeting, 2
if you have any additional questions you'd like to 3
speak with us about.
4 Thank you again for coming.
5 FACILITATOR CAMERON: Thank you. Good 6
job.
7 MS. FRANOVICH: Thank you. Likewise.
8 FACILITATOR CAMERON: It was a good 9
meeting. Thank you.
10 (Whereupon, the proceedings in the 11 foregoing matter went off the record at 12 4:32 p.m. and went back on the record at 13 7:00 p.m.)
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
139 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 1