November 17, 2015 

 

MEMORANDUM TO: James Rubenstone, Acting Director 

Yucca Mountain Directorate 

Office of Nuclear Material Safety 

 and Safeguards 

FROM: Christine Pineda, Project Manager /RA/ 

 Yucca Mountain Directorate 

 Office of Nuclear Material Safety 

 and Safeguards 

SUBJECT: SUMMARY OF NOVEMBER 12 PUBLIC MEETING ON THE NRC 

STAFF’S DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF 

ENERGY’S EIS FOR THE PROPOSED REPOSITORY AT YUCCA 

MOUNTAIN, NEVADA 

On Thursday, November 12, 2015, members of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

(NRC) staff held a Category 3 public meeting via teleconference. The purpose of the meeting 

was to provide an overview of the NRC staff’s draft supplement to the U.S. Department of 

Energy’s (DOE) environmental impact statements for the proposed high-level waste repository 

at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, and to accept public comments on the document. Participants also 

had an opportunity to ask clarifying questions about the NRC’s environmental review process. 

The public meeting began at 2:00 p.m. Eastern Time and concluded at approximately 4:00 p.m. 

The meeting began with an introduction of NRC staff and a review of meeting ground rules, 

followed by a presentation on the draft supplement. Meeting attendees were then given the 

opportunity to ask clarifying questions on the NRC’s environmental review process and present 

their comments on the draft supplement. The transcript for the meeting is available in ADAMS 

at Accession No. ML15321A414. 

Approximately 31 people attended the meeting, and 12 people gave comments one or more 

times during the meeting. Meeting attendees included members of the public, members of 

federal, tribal, state, and local government organizations, and members of media organizations 

and public advocacy groups. A list of meeting attendees is attached to this summary. 

One attendee requested clarification about the circumstances under which the licensing process 

for the proposed repository was stopped. Another attendee asked whether the NRC staff 

considered the potential for a catastrophic event to occur at the proposed repository. 

Topics and concerns that were raised included: the scope of the supplement; the potential for 

disproportionate impacts on minority and low-income populations, especially Native Americans; 

the potential for infiltration of rainwater into the repository tunnels and for flooding of the tunnels; 

and the potential for leakage of spent nuclear fuel storage containers. 

Some comments expressed general opposition to nuclear power and calls to shut down nuclear 

power plants. Other comments concerned the suitability of Yucca Mountain as a site for high-
J. Rubenstone - 2 - 

level radioactive waste disposal and the possibility that the Yucca Mountain site is being 

“resurrected” as a possible location for high-level waste disposal. Some commenters stated 

that the waste should be kept in hardened dry storage at existing sites or repackaged as an 

alternative to a repository at Yucca Mountain; others expressed support for other technologies 

as alternatives to disposal at Yucca Mountain. 

Commenters expressed concerns about the need for repackaging spent fuel in dry storage at 

reactor sites without a pool; the level of protection against radiation for workers; the safety of 

future generations; the safety of dry cask storage; the potential for accidents and other risks 

associated with transporting spent fuel, including by rail and barge; and concern that the NRC 

does not appear to be using data from the Fukushima accident in NRC evaluations for power 

reactors. 

A commenter called for the federal government to improve the transfer of knowledge and 

information to local governments and citizens and for better government representation of U.S. 

citizens. Commenters expressed concern about the Price-Anderson Act and its effect on the 

costs of nuclear power; and how historical decisions in the U.S. about radioactive materials 

disproportionately affect Native American and low-income populations. Another comment called 

for interested stakeholders to provide information about Yucca Mountain to contribute to an 

“engineering tribute” to be held after the next presidential inauguration. 

To subscribe to our e-mail updates, send an e-mail with the word “Subscribe” in the subject line 

to YMEIS_supplement@nrc.gov. 

Enclosure: Meeting Attendees List 

CONTACT: Christine Pineda, NMSS/YMD 

 (301) 415-6789 
J. Rubenstone - 2 - 

“resurrected” as a possible location for high-level waste disposal. Some commenters stated 

that the waste should be kept in hardened dry storage at existing sites or repackaged as an 

alternative to a repository at Yucca Mountain; others expressed support for other technologies 

as alternatives to disposal at Yucca Mountain. 

Commenters expressed concerns about the need for repackaging spent fuel in dry storage at 

reactor sites without a pool; the level of protection against radiation for workers; the safety of 

future generations; the safety of dry cask storage; the potential for accidents and other risks 

associated with transporting spent fuel, including by rail and barge; and concern that the NRC 

does not appear to be using data from the Fukushima accident in NRC evaluations for power 

reactors. 

A commenter called for the federal government to improve the transfer of knowledge and 

information to local governments and citizens and for better government representation of U.S. 

citizens. Commenters expressed concern about the Price-Anderson Act and its effect on the 

costs of nuclear power; and how historical decisions in the U.S. about radioactive materials 

disproportionately affect Native American and low-income populations. Another comment called 

for interested stakeholders to provide information about Yucca Mountain to contribute to an 

“engineering tribute” to be held after the next presidential inauguration. 

Enclosure: Meeting Attendees List 

DISTRIBUTION:

PUBLIC 

NMSS/YMD Distribution 

CSafford (OGC) 

AGendelman (OGC) 

Miriam Juckett (mjuckett@swri.org) 

ADAMS Accession No.: ML15321A424 

OFFICE NMSS/YMD OGC NMSS/YMD 

NAME CPineda AGendelman 

via email

JRubenstone 

via email 

DATE 11/16/2015 11/17/2015 11/16/2015 

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
 Enclosure 

List of Attendees 

Public Meeting on the NRC Staff’s Draft Supplement to the 

Department of Energy Environmental Impact Statements for the 

Proposed Geologic Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada 

November 12, 2015; 2:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.

First Name Last Name Organization or Affiliation (if known) 

1 Jana Bergman Curtis Wright 

2 Jan Boudart Nuclear Energy Information Service of Chicago 

3 Mary Beth Brangan Ecological Options Network 

4 Michael Callahan Government Strategies Incorporated 

5 Susan Carpenter Cape Downwinders 

6 Lorie Cartwright New England Coalition 

7 Patrick Dostie State of Maine 

8 Kenneth Freelain International Definition 

9 Maureen Headington Stand Up Save Lives Campaign 

10 Catherine Heaney Citizen 

11 Ace Hoffman Citizen 

12 Elaine Kabala Inyo County, California 

13 Kevin Kamps Beyond Nuclear 

14 Whitedove Kennedy Timbisha Shoshone Tribe 

15 Phil Klevorick Clark County Nuclear Waste Division 

16 John LaForge NukeWatch 

17 Marvin Lewis Citizen 

18 Martin Malsch Egan Malsch Fitzpatrick 

19 Bette Pierman Michigan Safe Energy Future 

20 Ethyl Rivera Citizen 

21 Judy Treichel Nevada Nuclear Waste Task Force 

22 Toby Walter Neil R. Gross & Company (transcriber) 

23 Lissa Weinmann World Policy Institute 

24 Chip Cameron Zero Gravity Group (facilitator) 

25 Miriam Juckett Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analyses 

26 David Decker U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

27 Randy Fedors U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

28 Adam Gendelman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

29 David McIntyre U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

30 Christine Pineda U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

31 James Rubenstone U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission