Minutes - 12-06-2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Dr. Thompson spoke about the possibility of dry storage of the spent fuel. CP&L has chosen to use high-density wet storage. He believes that this decision is based on the cost of dry storage. He spoke about the probability of an accident at the Harris plant. He said that an accident of this nature would be seen as something on the scale of the Civil War as an historic event. In closing, he said that, at a minimum, this issue should be the subject of an open evidentiary hearing and followed by an environmental impact statement. 4. QUESTIONS ANDIOR COMMENTS FROM COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Chair Halkiotis said that the CP&L staff and the NRC staff have submitted expert reports to the licensing authorities, which conclude that the passibility of a severe spent fuel pool accident is too low to be worthy of consideration. He asked Dr. Thompson why C)range County should believe him rather than the other experts from CP&L and the NRC staff. Dr. Thompson said that when he first came to talk about these issues, bath the NRC staff and CP&L disputed that the pools could suffer a fire at all. The NRC and CP&L has dropped this position and has also dropped apposition to technical arguments that were made about the role of water levels and cooling of pools. He mentioned that the government of a west German state accepted his arguments on this position and ruled that they would not license high-density pawls. He said that this suggests that he has some level of credibility on this issue, sufficient to be allowed to speak at an evidentiary hearing. Cammissianer Jacobs asked for clarification on whether this would be the largest high-level nuclear waste spent fuel repository in the United States. Dr. Thompson said that he believed that this was true. Commissioner Jacobs said that, in speaking with one of CP&L's "hired guns" after one of the hearings, he characterized Dr. Thompson as a "hired gun" that would turn around and argue that dry cask storage was not as safe as pool storage. He asked Dr. Thompson to address the advantages of dry cask storage. Dr. Thompson said that dry cask storage relies on passive cooling. No electricity or cooling water is required for the dry cask storage. By contrast, the pool storage method required an ongoing supply of electricity, cooling water, and maintenance. Commissioner Jacobs asked how Orange County was doing in the process. Dr. Thompson said that Orange County is to be congratulated far taking on this issue and for having the patience to stick with it. He said that Orange County has taken this issue further than any other entity has been able ta. He said that if a hearing occurs it would be a major victory far democratic processes in the pursuit of truth. Commissioner Jacobs asked how close Orange County was to getting to an evidentiary hearing. Dr. Thompson said that the ruling would be made tomorrow by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board. He thinks there are powerful arguments favoring an open hearing. Cammissianer Carey said that it seems that wet storage is mare labor-intensive than dry storage. He asked why dry storage would be mare expensive for CP&L. Dr. Thompson said that, from the view of operating casts, dry storage would be cheaper. However, the pools exist, and part of the coaling equipment already exists. He said that the true increment of cast was hard to determine because CP&L could strike a hard bargain with a dry storage company. He would be curious to know the expenditure the company has made on fighting this case. Commissioner Brown asked Dr. Thompson to review his other concerns that the NRC did not want to speak about. Dr. Thompson said that there were several technical and environmental contentions. He said that the normal licensing of nuclear facilities is done under the Atomic Energy Act. Under this act, severe accidents are simply not considered. Eventually, it was recognized in the federal government that severe accidents can and da happen (ex. Three Mile Island and Chernobyl). Legally, this is handled by the National Environmental Protection Act through an environmental impact statement. When he raised the concerns about a severe accident, this was done under the heading of an environmental contention, under NEPO as opposed to the Atomic Energy Act. The licensing board declined to hear the environmental contentions because the staff of the NRC was