Document ID: 0.7.395.5443 From: Pope, Patrick L. To: BOARD List Cc: EPC List Bcc: Subject: Economic Impact Study about Cooper Nuclear Station Date: Sun Feb 11 2018 18:30:32 CST Attachments: Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf Dear Directors: As mentioned at last week’s Board Meeting, NPPD has found value in several services provided by the Nuclear Energy Institute. The most recent example is the attached economic impact study issued last week. NEI uses a statistical model, along with data we provide, to determine the economic impact of the nation’s nuclear power plants, and in our case, Cooper generates more than $112 million in annual economic output. This is done, in part, through direct jobs at the plant, as well as jobs throughout the local area and state. The study breaks down various categories which benefit from the economic engine of Cooper and includes additional information about our community engagement. I encourage you to review the report. We will be sharing it with the media and with our elected officials at the local and state level in the coming days. The study’s findings were also shared in this week’s issue of the Nuclear Energy Overview. https://resources.nei.org/documents/NEO.pdf A second NEI service you may recall is NEI’s Plant Neighbor Survey, conducted by a national research firm last fall with 250 residents living within 30 miles of Cooper. The survey revealed 92 percent of people living around the plant have a favorable impression of CNS and how it has operated recently; 71 percent have a very favorable impression. Those survey results indicated some of the positive perception is due to the economic value the plant provides the five counties nearby and the state as a whole. Should you have any questions about the report, please don’t hesitate to contact me. Page 1 of 408 Pat (402) 469-4436 cell Safety Security See something? SAY something! Page 2 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5443-000001 Owner: Pope, Patrick L. Filename: Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf Last Modified: Sun Feb 11 18:30:32 CST 2018 Page 3 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1162 ( Attachment 1 of 1) ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE COOPER NUCLEAR STATION AN ANALYSIS BY THE NUCLE AR ENERGY INSTITUTE FEBRUARY 2018 Page 4 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1162 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 1 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute February 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary.................................................................................................... 2 Historical Background................................................................................................ 4 State and Regional Benefits.................................................................................... 5 Community Leadership and Environmental Protection................................... 7 Economic Impact Analysis Methodology.......................................................... 10 Conclusion.................................................................................................................... 11 © 2018 Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc., Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station all rights reserved. Photo credits: Nebraska Public Power District, Shutterstock, flickr/Richard Bauer, flickr/John Carrel, flickr/Ali Eminov No part of this report may be reproduced, transmitted or modified without written permission of the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. Page 5 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1162 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 2 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute Cooper’s operations support more than February 2018 Cooper provides more than 1,000 Nebraska jobs, $112 million annually 680 jobs $66 million including more than in its 5 neighboring counties in state economic output, including in its 5 neighboring counties EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Cooper Nuclear Station (Cooper), located along the Missouri River in the southeast corner of Nebraska, has long been a vital part of the region’s energy portfolio, providing reliable electricity since it began operating in 1974. In addition to this reliable, carbonfree electricity, the plant supports hundreds of direct jobs. Employee involvement in their community also makes Cooper a significant social and economic contributor to Nebraska. Cooper is Nebraska’s largest single source of carbon-free electricity. To quantify the economic impacts of this facility in Nebraska, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) conducted an independent analysis. Based on data provided by Nebraska Public Power District (Cooper’s owner/operator) on employment and operating expenditures, NEI conducted the analysis using the PI+ model provided by Regional Economic Models Inc. (REMI), a nationally recognized model. KEY FINDINGS Cooper’s operations provide: Employment benefits Cooper supports hundreds of jobs in the five counties surrounding the plant (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe and Richardson) and the rest of Nebraska through its operations. NEI estimates that the total number of jobs supported by Cooper annually is more than 1,000. That includes more than 680 jobs in the five counties surrounding the plant and 320 jobs in the rest of Nebraska. These employment numbers include direct and additional jobs created as a result of the expenditures from Cooper operations. more than $66 million for the five counties surrounding the plant and more than $46 million for the rest of Nebraska. While there are economic benefits to other states, particularly in nearby Missouri and Iowa, this study focused on the state of Nebraska. Economic stimulus Cooper produces significant economic benefits for Nebraska through its plant operations. NEI’s analysis finds that Cooper generates more than $112 million in annual economic output (value added), which includes 2018 total estimated economic benefits for the Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe and Richardson counties surrounding the Cooper Nuclear Station include: • $66 million in economic output from plant operations • $63 million increase in gross state product • $70 million in disposable personal income 2018 estimated economic benefits for the rest of Nebraska include: • $46 million in economic output from plant operations • $26 million increase in gross state product • $32 million in disposable personal income Page 6 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1162 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 3 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute Cooper prevents CO2 emissions equal to approximately 1.4 million cars each year Long-term economic stimulus This study finds that between 2018 and 2034 (60-year license expiration date), Cooper’s operations will generate more than $1.9 billion in economic output for Nebraska, including $1.2 billion to the five counties surrounding the plant and an additional $675 million in the rest of Nebraska. Clean electricity for Nebraska Cooper’s operations generate carbon-free clean electricity. Cooper prevents the release of more than 6.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually,1 the same amount released by approximately 1.4 million cars every year.2 For perspective, there are an estimated 733,000 passenger cars in Nebraska.3 February 2018 Cooper’s operation will result in more than $1.9 billion in economic benefits for Nebraska between 2018 and 2034 Reliability benefits As part of the Nebraska Public Power District's fleet of generating facilities, Cooper provides 820 MWs of reliable, carbon-free electricity. During the past five years, the station operated at more than 93 percent of capacity,4 on par with the industry average and significantly higher than other forms of electricity generation. This reliable production helps offset potential price volatility of other energy sources (e.g., natural gas) and the intermittency of renewable electricity sources. 1 Emissions prevented are calculated using the weighted average CO2 emissions rate (2,095 lbs/MWh) for the Midwest Reliability Organization region, provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Nebraska Public Power District reported electricity generation of 6.9 million MWh in 2017 from Cooper. 2 Calculated using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator. https://www.epa.gov/energy/ greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator . 3 Retrieved using January 2017 release of the highway statistics from the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. 4 Retrieved using ABB Velocity Suite, which sourced the data from U.S. Energy Information Administration. Page 7 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1162 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 4 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute February 2018 Cooper Nuclear Station • Type: Boiling water reactor • Commencement of commercial operation in 1974 • Located along the Missouri River in SE Nebraska • 60 year license expires in 2034 • Total gross electricity capacity: 820 MW HISTORICAL BACKGROUND Cooper Nuclear Station is located along the Missouri River in the southeast corner of Nebraska. It consists of one boiling water reactor that produces 820 megawatts (MW) of carbon-free baseload power. Cooper Nuclear Station is owned and operated by Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) and supplies the electric grid through the Southwest Power Pool, a regional transmission organization. Cooper is named after Humboldt, Nebraska, natives Guy Cooper Sr. and Guy Cooper Jr. in recognition of their contribution to public power in Nebraska. Cooper began commercial operation in 1974 under an initial 40-year operating license, which was renewed in 2010 by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for an additional 20 years. Its current license expiration is in 2034. THOUSANDS OF LOCAL JOBS Cooper employs approximately 680 people, with more than 550 of them living in Nebraska.6 The annual payroll and benefits are more than $76 million for permanent employees and contractors, including over $60 million in the five counties surrounding the plant and more than $2.8 million in the rest of Nebraska. Most jobs at nuclear power plants require technical training and are typically among the highest-paying jobs in the area. Nationwide, nuclear energy jobs pay 36 percent more than average salaries in a plant’s local area.7 SAFE AND CLEAN FOR THE ENVIRONMENT RELIABLE ELECTRICITY GENERATION Generating clean energy is an important step in reducing the effects of climate change and vital to protecting the environment for current and future generations. Nuclear energy facilities generate large amount of electricity without emitting greenhouse gases. State and federal policymakers recognize nuclear energy as an essential source of safe, reliable electricity that meets both environmental needs and demand for electricity. As the sole nuclear power plant in Nebraska, Cooper generated more than 6.9 million megawatt-hours in 2017,5 a new record for the plant. This results in Cooper providing power to over 385,000 Nebraskans during a nonrefueling outage year like 2017. Refueling outages occur every 24 months, with the next one scheduled for fall 2018. Cooper, like all nuclear power plants, produces baseload power that is carbon-free. Cooper avoids the emission of over 6.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually, the same amount released by approximately 1.4 million cars every year. For perspective, there are an estimated 733,000 passenger cars in Nebraska. Cooper also prevented the release of other air pollutants–over 7,900 short tons of sulfur dioxide8 and more than 5,590 short tons of nitrogen oxide9 —which are precursors to acid rain and urban smog. 5 Nebraska Public Power District reported the 2017 electricity 8 Emissions prevented are calculated using the weighted Cooper operated at a capacity factor of over 93 percent over the last five years.4 Capacity factor, a measure of electricity production efficiency, is the ratio of actual electricity generated to the maximum possible electric generation during the year. generation to via U.S. Energy Information Administration Form EIA-923. 6 Nebraska Public Power District provided 2016 actual employment numbers. 7 “Nuclear Energy’s Economic Benefits—Current and Future.” Nuclear Energy Institute, 2014. average sulfur dioxide emissions rate (2.2994 lbs/MWh) for the Midwest Reliability Organization region, provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 9 Emissions prevented are calculated using the weighted average nitrogen oxide emissions rate (1.6203 lbs/MWh) for the Midwest Reliability Organization region, provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Page 8 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1162 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 5 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute February 2018 STATE AND REGIONAL BENEFITS NEI used the REMI PI+ model (version 2.1.5) to analyze economic and expenditure data provided by NPPD to develop estimates of its economic benefits from Cooper Nuclear Station’s operations. More information on REMI can be found on page 10. The economic impacts of Cooper discussed in this section consist of the following variables that are used to analyze these impacts: Output Output, in this context, refers to the economic activity generated by Cooper Nuclear Station. The direct output is the economic activity produced by the facility. The secondary output is the value of the economic activity generated in other industries because of Cooper, as well as how people employed at the facility influence the demand for goods and services within the region. Employment The direct employment is the number of jobs at Cooper. Secondary employment is jobs in other industries as a result of Cooper’s operations. Gross state product Cooper contributes to Nebraska’s gross state product, which the REMI model calculates as value of goods and services produced by labor and property—minus intermediate goods. For a nuclear plant, electricity is the final good. The intermediate goods are the components purchased to make that electricity. Disposable personal income Cooper contributes a significant sum to Nebraska’s disposable personal income, which is one of the indicators used by economists to monitor the state of the economy. Disposable personal income identifies the available household money for spending and saving after accounting for the income taxes. Reliable power The reliable availability of Cooper’s power is critical to such things as national security and regional grid stability. Commercial businesses, industries, and manufacturing facilities which require power 24 hours a day, seven days a week also benefit from Cooper’s constant supply of electricity. STATE AND REGIONAL ECONOMIC EFFECTS Cooper’s total 2018 annual economic output impact on Nebraska is estimated to be over $112 million in direct and secondary impact, including over $66 million to the five counties surrounding the plant (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe and Richardson) and more than $46 million for the rest of Nebraska. Cooper contributes more than $89 million to Nebraska’s gross state product in 2018, including $63 million to the five counties and over $25 million to the rest of Nebraska. Cooper also contributes approximately $102 million to Nebraska’s disposable personal income in 2018, including $70 million to the five counties and $32 million to the rest of Nebraska. Table 1 summarizes the plant’s effects on the five counties and the rest of Nebraska’s economies, the gross state product and disposable personal income in 2018 from operations. Cooper’s operations have substantial economic impact on other industries. Cooper’s output also stimulates the state’s and region’s labor income and employment. The plant employs approximately 528 people in permanent and contracting jobs in the five counties and 23 people in the rest of Nebraska.10 These jobs stimulate over 450 additional jobs in the five counties and the rest of Nebraska. Table 2 details the quantity and types of jobs that Cooper supports. Plant workers are included in the table’s utility occupation category. LONG-TERM ECONOMIC BENEFITS This study finds that between 2018 and 2034 (the 60-year license expiration date), Cooper’s operations will generate over $1.9 billion in economic output to Nebraska, including $1.2 billion to the five counties surrounding the plant and an additional $675 million in the rest of the state. 10 NPPD provided the 2016 actual employment numbers. Cooper also hires approximately 130 people across Iowa, Missouri and elsewhere, however the numbers were not utilized for the purpose of this Nebraska-based study. Page 9 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1162 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Table 1 COOPER’S ECONOMIC IMPACT (dollars in 2016 millions) Direct and Secondary Economic Output11 Description 2018 2018 to 2034 Output $66 $1,239 Gross State Product $63 Disposable Personal Income $70 (license expiration) Five counties surrounding the plant (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe and Richardson) Rest of Nebraska Output $215 Gross State Product $25 Disposable Personal Income $32 $675 Table 2 JOB IMPACTS FROM COOPER OPERATIONS Category Five Neighboring Counties Rest of Nebraska Total Utilities12 528 23 551 Retail Trade 81 64 145 Other Services (except public administration) 19 35 54 Health Care, Social Assistance 16 57 73 Accommodation, Food Services 14 26 40 Finance, Insurance 9 16 25 Construction 6 10 16 Wholesale Trade 2 11 13 Professional, Scientific, Technical Services 1 19 20 Arts, Entertainment, Recreation 1 7 8 Manufacturing 1 6 7 Real Estate, Rental and Leasing 1 9 10 Transportation, Warehousing 1 6 7 Administrative, Waste Management Services 1 18 18 Other Industries 1 12 13 681 320 1,001 Total 11 Direct output was calculated based on a four-year average between 2013 and 2016, in 2016 dollars. 12 Utilities sector includes direct employment at Cooper Nuclear Station in Nebraska and secondary employment from the rest of Nebraska to support the operations. Page 10 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1162 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 7 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute February 2018 COMMUNITY LEADERSHIP AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION In addition to the economic benefits Nebraska Public Power District contributes to the region in the form of jobs, income and economic output, NPPD and its employees play a major role in the health and welfare of the community. Cooper employees are involved in local community organizations, providing both voluntary and financial support. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Community leadership Cooper employees are active members of their communities. They serve on city councils, coach athletic teams, and own local businesses. Cooper staff are engaged in local philanthropic events and responding to local community needs during such events as storms and floods. Cooper employees also volunteer in community parades, local chamber of commerce chili cook-offs, holiday angel tree gift donations and school science fairs. School programs Cooper Nuclear Station is directly involved with the Energy Generation Operations Program at Southeast Community College (SECC) in Milford, Nebraska. The program began in 2008 as a way to train future operators and has emerged into a successful program that gives students hands-on operations training at the plant site. The students are prepared for employment at a nuclear power plant during the two-year program. NPPD continually provides opportunities to the students through tours, job shadowing experiences and recruitment upon graduation. NPPD’s energy education team and communication professionals bring presentations to schools and local civic groups to educate them about the benefits of nuclear power and Cooper’s support for the community. NPPD in 2017 set up its mobile science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) lab at Johnson High School for two weeks. Students and teachers took time to explore the lab, create, engineer, and experience job-related tasks to understand the importance and excitement of a career in the energy industry. The mobile STEM lab is complemented by online curriculum models, in-class presentations, robotic interactions with students and a statewide robotics program. At least 400 middle and high school students in five schools from around Cooper participated in one or more of Cooper’s energy education activities in 2017. Site tours NPPD encourages facility tours among its community. Cooper employees host the Nebraska LEAD Program, where members of the Nebraska Agriculture Leadership Council tour Cooper as part of the program’s educational site visits. Cooper has hosted representatives from Japan, as well as the USS Nebraska (SSBN-739), a nuclear-powered, Ohio-class submarine. Cooper conducts about 20 tours of the station every year, including tours for the Nebraska National Guard, local law enforcement, state dignitaries, international visitors, and local schools and colleges. Page 11 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1162 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 8 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute Plant Neighbor Survey A recent survey13 conducted for the Cooper Nuclear Station showed exceptional support from local residents, compared to the benchmarks from other nuclear power plants. The results are comparable to the same survey conducted in 2011. Ninety-two percent of Cooper’s neighbors have a favorable impression of the plant and its recent operations; 71 percent have a very favorable impression. In addition, 88 percent of Cooper’s neighbors favor nuclear energy. Respondents indicated their support for Cooper is based on perceptions of the plant’s safe operations and their favorable view of NPPD regarding economic impact, jobs, safety, community outreach and environmental protection. The survey also found: • 94 percent of respondents are confident in NPPD’s ability to operate a nuclear power plant safely. • 93 percent of Cooper’s neighbors believe nuclear energy will be important to meeting the nation’s electricity needs. • 93 percent said NPPD is doing a good job of protecting the environment. • 84 percent feel somewhat well informed about nuclear energy. • 72 percent believe people living near a nuclear plant are unlikely to be exposed to harmful levels of radiation. February 2018 ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP There has been no significant environmental impact recorded at Cooper Nuclear Station. NPPD's environmental stewardship is multifaceted, including such initiatives as developing wetlands and participating in pollinator programs in the area around Cooper. The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program at Cooper monitors radiation in ambient air, drinking water, river water, farm animal milk samples, soil, sediment, river fish and local vegetation. Samples are analyzed by an independent vendor and the results are provided to the public and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The results have never exceeded regulatory limits. Fire Brigade and Emergency Medical Technicians Cooper employs nearly 100 individuals who serve as members of the on-site fire brigade or who are certified as emergency medical technicians (EMTs). Additionally, all Cooper employees are trained to perform first responder duties in the event of an emergency. NPPD’s Hazardous Material Emergency Response Plan also identifies specifically trained individuals and teams to respond to particular events (such as spills, fires or medical emergencies), if required. This dedication to safety expands beyond Cooper. Members of its fire brigade also support their local fire departments, and Cooper’s EMTs serve on area response crews. They also participate in and lead training courses for area fire departments and rescue squads. 13 The survey was conducted by Bisconti Research Inc. and Quest Global Research in the fall of 2017. Approximately 250 people living within 10 miles of Cooper Nuclear Station were surveyed. The purpose of the survey was to measure the opinions of local residents about the plant as a neighbor, employer and economic engine. Page 12 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1162 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 9 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute Emergency Preparedness Plan Cooper's operations always prioritize safety. NPPD partners with the states of Nebraska and Missouri to ensure the public safety is always top of mind. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission carefully regulates and tests the validity of Cooper’s emergency preparedness plan, designed to protect public health and safety in the unlikely event of an incident. High training standards and well-qualified staff demonstrate NPPD’s commitment to ensure that the physical environment is safe for all residents. Members of Cooper's emergency response organization are annually tested and qualified to perform their roles. Cooper tests its emergency response plan multiple times throughout the year. Exercises and drills are conducted both on-site and in partnership with the Nebraska Emergency Management Agency and the State of Missouri Emergency Management Agency, as well as county, state and local law enforcement, and regulatory entities such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the NRC. Cooper provides both emergency information and an in-home radio alert system to residents living within a 10-mile radius of the plant. NPPD's call center also is part of Cooper's emergency response organization and will answer calls 24x7. As a statewide utility, NPPD uses Cooper’s emergency response plan as a reference for similar crisis preparations, including its cyber security response plan, emergency restoration exercises, and its participation in the national Grid Ex exercise. February 2018 Personnel qualifications Cooper’s Fitness for Duty Program ensures employees are qualified to access the site. Employees are hired after a stringent background check and drug screening. NPPD conducts random daily drug tests to measure and monitor employee performance. Cooper is home to the Cooper Nuclear Station Learning Center which provides comprehensive training for employees on a variety of industry and operational programs. A specially-designed simulator of the power plant’s control room assists in training NPPD personnel to operate the plant in both normal and emergency conditions. Every Cooper reactor operator must undergo extensive training to earn an operator license from the NRC, and ongoing training is required to maintain a reactor operators' license. Industry Performance and Regulatory Standing Cooper Nuclear Station is a member of the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) and benefits from the organization’s evaluation and benchmarking processes. The mission of INPO is to “promote the highest level of safety and reliability—to promote excellence—in the performance of commercial nuclear power plants." Cooper continues to perform in the highest category of the NRC's Reactor Oversight Process Action Matrix. Page 13 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1162 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 10 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute February 2018 ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY This analysis uses the REMI PI+ version 2.1.5 model to estimate the economic and fiscal impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station. REGIONAL ECONOMIC MODELS INC. 1. Input/output tabulation (IO)—IO models, sometimes called “social accounting matrices” (SAM), quantify the interrelation of industries and households in a computational sense. It models the flow of goods between firms in supply chains, wages paid to households, and final consumption by households, governments and the international market. These channels create the “multiplier” effect of $1 going further. The REMI model has two main purposes: forecasting and analysis of alternatives. All models have a “baseline” forecast of the future of a regional economy at the county level. Using “policy variables,” in REMI terminology, provides scenarios based on different situations. The ability to model policy variables makes it a powerful tool for conveying the economic “story” behind policy. The model translates various considerations into understandable concepts like gross domestic product and jobs. 2. Computable general equilibrium (CGE)—CGE modeling adds market concepts to the IO structure. This includes how IO structures evolve over time and how they respond to alternative policies. CGE incorporates concepts on markets for labor, housing, consumer goods, imports and the importance of competitiveness to fostering economic growth over time. Changing one of these will influence the others—for instance, a new knife factory would improve the labor market by increasing migration into the area, driving housing and rent prices higher, and inducing the market to create a new subdivision to return to “market clearing” conditions. Regional Economic Models Inc. (REMI), headquartered in Amherst, Massachusetts, is a modeling firm specializing in services related to economic impacts and policy analysis. It provides software, support services, and issue-based expertise and consulting in almost every state, the District of Columbia, and other countries in North America, Europe, Latin America, the Middle East and Asia. REMI relies on data from public sources, including the Bureau of Economic Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Energy Information Administration and the Census Bureau. Forecasts for future macroeconomic conditions in REMI come from a combination of resources, which serve as the main framework for the software model needed to perform simulations. POLICY INSIGHT PLUS REMI’s Policy Insight Plus (PI+) is a computerized, multiregional, dynamic model of the states or other subnational units of the United States economy. PI+ relies on four quantitative methodologies to guide its approach to economic modeling: 3. Econometrics—REMI uses statistical parameters and historical data to populate the numbers inside the IO and CGE portions. The estimation of the different parameters, elasticity terms and figures gives the strength of various responses. It also gives the “time-lags” from the beginning of a policy to the point where markets have had a chance to clear. 4. New economic geography—Economic geography provides REMI a sense of economies of scale and agglomeration. It quantifies the strength of clusters in an area and their influence on productivity in that sector. The concentrated labor in an area is specialized to serve companies, thus, their longterm productivity grows more quickly than that of smaller regions with no proclivity in that sector. Page 14 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1162 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 11 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute February 2018 CONCLUSION ECONOMIC AND EMPLOYMENT IMPACTS NEI’s analysis finds that Cooper generates more than $112 million in annual economic output in Nebraska through its continued operations. This includes over $66 million for the five counties surrounding the station (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe and Richardson) and more than $46 million for the rest of Nebraska. NEI’s analysis also finds that Cooper supports more than 1,000 jobs annually, which includes 680 jobs in the five counties and more than 320 jobs in the rest of Nebraska from continued operations. FURTHER BENEFITS OF COOPER The station’s economic benefits—through wages and purchases of supplies and services—are considerable. In addition, plant employees further stimulate the local economy by purchasing goods and services from businesses around the area, supporting many small businesses in Nebraska. The facility generated 6.9 million megawatt-hours of carbon-free electricity in 2017, enough to serve the yearly needs for hundreds of thousands of homes. Cooper Nuclear Station is an important contributor to NPPD's generation portfolio, serving the energy needs of Nebraskans with carbon-free and reliable electricity. Page 15 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1162 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute February 2018 1201 F Street, NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 nei.org Page 16 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.12318 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. To: Pope, Patrick L. ; McClure, John C. Cc: Becker, Mark C. Bcc: Subject: Economic Impact Study about Cooper Nuclear Station Date: Sun Feb 11 2018 18:24:08 CST Attachments: Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf Pat, I drafted a note for you below to send to the board about the NEI Economic Impact Study issued last week. Feel free to modify, as you would like. Alan informed me the report was mentioned in the Nuclear Energy Overview, so I have included that as well, if you think they would be interested. Becker is finalizing a press release which I am hoping will go out tomorrow. We plan do to some social media posts, as well as work with Courtney and Shirley on how they want to share the info with senators. – Jeanne Dear Board of Directors, As mentioned at last week’s Board Meeting, NPPD has found value in several services provided by the Nuclear Energy Institute. The most recent example is the attached economic impact study issued last week. NEI uses a statistical model, along with data we provide, to determine the economic impact of the nation’s nuclear power plants, and in our case, Cooper generates more than $112 million in annual economic output. This is done, in part, through direct jobs at the plant, as well as jobs throughout the local area and state. The study breaks down various categories which benefit from the economic engine of Cooper and includes additional information about our community engagement. I encourage you to review the report. We will be sharing it with the media and with our elected officials at the local and state level in the coming days. The study’s findings were also shared in this week’s issue of the Nuclear Energy Overview. https: //resources.nei.org/documents/NEO.pdf A second NEI service you may recall is NEI’s Plant Neighbor Survey, conducted by a national research firm last fall with 250 residents living within 30 miles of Cooper. The survey revealed 92 percent of people living around the plant have a favorable impression of CNS and how it has operated recently; 71 percent have a very favorable impression. Those survey results indicated some of the positive perception is due to the economic value the plant provides the five counties nearby and the state as a whole. Page 17 of 408 Should you have any questions about the report, please don’t hesitate to contact me. Pat Page 18 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.12318-000001 Owner: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Filename: Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf Last Modified: Sun Feb 11 18:24:08 CST 2018 Page 19 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1164 ( Attachment 1 of 1) ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE COOPER NUCLEAR STATION AN ANALYSIS BY THE NUCLE AR ENERGY INSTITUTE FEBRUARY 2018 Page 20 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1164 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 1 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute February 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary.................................................................................................... 2 Historical Background................................................................................................ 4 State and Regional Benefits.................................................................................... 5 Community Leadership and Environmental Protection................................... 7 Economic Impact Analysis Methodology.......................................................... 10 Conclusion.................................................................................................................... 11 © 2018 Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc., Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station all rights reserved. Photo credits: Nebraska Public Power District, Shutterstock, flickr/Richard Bauer, flickr/John Carrel, flickr/Ali Eminov No part of this report may be reproduced, transmitted or modified without written permission of the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. Page 21 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1164 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 2 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute Cooper’s operations support more than February 2018 Cooper provides more than 1,000 Nebraska jobs, $112 million annually 680 jobs $66 million including more than in its 5 neighboring counties in state economic output, including in its 5 neighboring counties EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Cooper Nuclear Station (Cooper), located along the Missouri River in the southeast corner of Nebraska, has long been a vital part of the region’s energy portfolio, providing reliable electricity since it began operating in 1974. In addition to this reliable, carbonfree electricity, the plant supports hundreds of direct jobs. Employee involvement in their community also makes Cooper a significant social and economic contributor to Nebraska. Cooper is Nebraska’s largest single source of carbon-free electricity. To quantify the economic impacts of this facility in Nebraska, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) conducted an independent analysis. Based on data provided by Nebraska Public Power District (Cooper’s owner/operator) on employment and operating expenditures, NEI conducted the analysis using the PI+ model provided by Regional Economic Models Inc. (REMI), a nationally recognized model. KEY FINDINGS Cooper’s operations provide: Employment benefits Cooper supports hundreds of jobs in the five counties surrounding the plant (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe and Richardson) and the rest of Nebraska through its operations. NEI estimates that the total number of jobs supported by Cooper annually is more than 1,000. That includes more than 680 jobs in the five counties surrounding the plant and 320 jobs in the rest of Nebraska. These employment numbers include direct and additional jobs created as a result of the expenditures from Cooper operations. more than $66 million for the five counties surrounding the plant and more than $46 million for the rest of Nebraska. While there are economic benefits to other states, particularly in nearby Missouri and Iowa, this study focused on the state of Nebraska. Economic stimulus Cooper produces significant economic benefits for Nebraska through its plant operations. NEI’s analysis finds that Cooper generates more than $112 million in annual economic output (value added), which includes 2018 total estimated economic benefits for the Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe and Richardson counties surrounding the Cooper Nuclear Station include: • $66 million in economic output from plant operations • $63 million increase in gross state product • $70 million in disposable personal income 2018 estimated economic benefits for the rest of Nebraska include: • $46 million in economic output from plant operations • $26 million increase in gross state product • $32 million in disposable personal income Page 22 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1164 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 3 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute Cooper prevents CO2 emissions equal to approximately 1.4 million cars each year Long-term economic stimulus This study finds that between 2018 and 2034 (60-year license expiration date), Cooper’s operations will generate more than $1.9 billion in economic output for Nebraska, including $1.2 billion to the five counties surrounding the plant and an additional $675 million in the rest of Nebraska. Clean electricity for Nebraska Cooper’s operations generate carbon-free clean electricity. Cooper prevents the release of more than 6.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually,1 the same amount released by approximately 1.4 million cars every year.2 For perspective, there are an estimated 733,000 passenger cars in Nebraska.3 February 2018 Cooper’s operation will result in more than $1.9 billion in economic benefits for Nebraska between 2018 and 2034 Reliability benefits As part of the Nebraska Public Power District's fleet of generating facilities, Cooper provides 820 MWs of reliable, carbon-free electricity. During the past five years, the station operated at more than 93 percent of capacity,4 on par with the industry average and significantly higher than other forms of electricity generation. This reliable production helps offset potential price volatility of other energy sources (e.g., natural gas) and the intermittency of renewable electricity sources. 1 Emissions prevented are calculated using the weighted average CO2 emissions rate (2,095 lbs/MWh) for the Midwest Reliability Organization region, provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Nebraska Public Power District reported electricity generation of 6.9 million MWh in 2017 from Cooper. 2 Calculated using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator. https://www.epa.gov/energy/ greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator . 3 Retrieved using January 2017 release of the highway statistics from the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. 4 Retrieved using ABB Velocity Suite, which sourced the data from U.S. Energy Information Administration. Page 23 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1164 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 4 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute February 2018 Cooper Nuclear Station • Type: Boiling water reactor • Commencement of commercial operation in 1974 • Located along the Missouri River in SE Nebraska • 60 year license expires in 2034 • Total gross electricity capacity: 820 MW HISTORICAL BACKGROUND Cooper Nuclear Station is located along the Missouri River in the southeast corner of Nebraska. It consists of one boiling water reactor that produces 820 megawatts (MW) of carbon-free baseload power. Cooper Nuclear Station is owned and operated by Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) and supplies the electric grid through the Southwest Power Pool, a regional transmission organization. Cooper is named after Humboldt, Nebraska, natives Guy Cooper Sr. and Guy Cooper Jr. in recognition of their contribution to public power in Nebraska. Cooper began commercial operation in 1974 under an initial 40-year operating license, which was renewed in 2010 by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for an additional 20 years. Its current license expiration is in 2034. THOUSANDS OF LOCAL JOBS Cooper employs approximately 680 people, with more than 550 of them living in Nebraska.6 The annual payroll and benefits are more than $76 million for permanent employees and contractors, including over $60 million in the five counties surrounding the plant and more than $2.8 million in the rest of Nebraska. Most jobs at nuclear power plants require technical training and are typically among the highest-paying jobs in the area. Nationwide, nuclear energy jobs pay 36 percent more than average salaries in a plant’s local area.7 SAFE AND CLEAN FOR THE ENVIRONMENT RELIABLE ELECTRICITY GENERATION Generating clean energy is an important step in reducing the effects of climate change and vital to protecting the environment for current and future generations. Nuclear energy facilities generate large amount of electricity without emitting greenhouse gases. State and federal policymakers recognize nuclear energy as an essential source of safe, reliable electricity that meets both environmental needs and demand for electricity. As the sole nuclear power plant in Nebraska, Cooper generated more than 6.9 million megawatt-hours in 2017,5 a new record for the plant. This results in Cooper providing power to over 385,000 Nebraskans during a nonrefueling outage year like 2017. Refueling outages occur every 24 months, with the next one scheduled for fall 2018. Cooper, like all nuclear power plants, produces baseload power that is carbon-free. Cooper avoids the emission of over 6.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually, the same amount released by approximately 1.4 million cars every year. For perspective, there are an estimated 733,000 passenger cars in Nebraska. Cooper also prevented the release of other air pollutants–over 7,900 short tons of sulfur dioxide8 and more than 5,590 short tons of nitrogen oxide9 —which are precursors to acid rain and urban smog. 5 Nebraska Public Power District reported the 2017 electricity 8 Emissions prevented are calculated using the weighted Cooper operated at a capacity factor of over 93 percent over the last five years.4 Capacity factor, a measure of electricity production efficiency, is the ratio of actual electricity generated to the maximum possible electric generation during the year. generation to via U.S. Energy Information Administration Form EIA-923. 6 Nebraska Public Power District provided 2016 actual employment numbers. 7 “Nuclear Energy’s Economic Benefits—Current and Future.” Nuclear Energy Institute, 2014. average sulfur dioxide emissions rate (2.2994 lbs/MWh) for the Midwest Reliability Organization region, provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 9 Emissions prevented are calculated using the weighted average nitrogen oxide emissions rate (1.6203 lbs/MWh) for the Midwest Reliability Organization region, provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Page 24 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1164 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 5 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute February 2018 STATE AND REGIONAL BENEFITS NEI used the REMI PI+ model (version 2.1.5) to analyze economic and expenditure data provided by NPPD to develop estimates of its economic benefits from Cooper Nuclear Station’s operations. More information on REMI can be found on page 10. The economic impacts of Cooper discussed in this section consist of the following variables that are used to analyze these impacts: Output Output, in this context, refers to the economic activity generated by Cooper Nuclear Station. The direct output is the economic activity produced by the facility. The secondary output is the value of the economic activity generated in other industries because of Cooper, as well as how people employed at the facility influence the demand for goods and services within the region. Employment The direct employment is the number of jobs at Cooper. Secondary employment is jobs in other industries as a result of Cooper’s operations. Gross state product Cooper contributes to Nebraska’s gross state product, which the REMI model calculates as value of goods and services produced by labor and property—minus intermediate goods. For a nuclear plant, electricity is the final good. The intermediate goods are the components purchased to make that electricity. Disposable personal income Cooper contributes a significant sum to Nebraska’s disposable personal income, which is one of the indicators used by economists to monitor the state of the economy. Disposable personal income identifies the available household money for spending and saving after accounting for the income taxes. Reliable power The reliable availability of Cooper’s power is critical to such things as national security and regional grid stability. Commercial businesses, industries, and manufacturing facilities which require power 24 hours a day, seven days a week also benefit from Cooper’s constant supply of electricity. STATE AND REGIONAL ECONOMIC EFFECTS Cooper’s total 2018 annual economic output impact on Nebraska is estimated to be over $112 million in direct and secondary impact, including over $66 million to the five counties surrounding the plant (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe and Richardson) and more than $46 million for the rest of Nebraska. Cooper contributes more than $89 million to Nebraska’s gross state product in 2018, including $63 million to the five counties and over $25 million to the rest of Nebraska. Cooper also contributes approximately $102 million to Nebraska’s disposable personal income in 2018, including $70 million to the five counties and $32 million to the rest of Nebraska. Table 1 summarizes the plant’s effects on the five counties and the rest of Nebraska’s economies, the gross state product and disposable personal income in 2018 from operations. Cooper’s operations have substantial economic impact on other industries. Cooper’s output also stimulates the state’s and region’s labor income and employment. The plant employs approximately 528 people in permanent and contracting jobs in the five counties and 23 people in the rest of Nebraska.10 These jobs stimulate over 450 additional jobs in the five counties and the rest of Nebraska. Table 2 details the quantity and types of jobs that Cooper supports. Plant workers are included in the table’s utility occupation category. LONG-TERM ECONOMIC BENEFITS This study finds that between 2018 and 2034 (the 60-year license expiration date), Cooper’s operations will generate over $1.9 billion in economic output to Nebraska, including $1.2 billion to the five counties surrounding the plant and an additional $675 million in the rest of the state. 10 NPPD provided the 2016 actual employment numbers. Cooper also hires approximately 130 people across Iowa, Missouri and elsewhere, however the numbers were not utilized for the purpose of this Nebraska-based study. Page 25 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1164 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Table 1 COOPER’S ECONOMIC IMPACT (dollars in 2016 millions) Direct and Secondary Economic Output11 Description 2018 2018 to 2034 Output $66 $1,239 Gross State Product $63 Disposable Personal Income $70 (license expiration) Five counties surrounding the plant (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe and Richardson) Rest of Nebraska Output $215 Gross State Product $25 Disposable Personal Income $32 $675 Table 2 JOB IMPACTS FROM COOPER OPERATIONS Category Five Neighboring Counties Rest of Nebraska Total Utilities12 528 23 551 Retail Trade 81 64 145 Other Services (except public administration) 19 35 54 Health Care, Social Assistance 16 57 73 Accommodation, Food Services 14 26 40 Finance, Insurance 9 16 25 Construction 6 10 16 Wholesale Trade 2 11 13 Professional, Scientific, Technical Services 1 19 20 Arts, Entertainment, Recreation 1 7 8 Manufacturing 1 6 7 Real Estate, Rental and Leasing 1 9 10 Transportation, Warehousing 1 6 7 Administrative, Waste Management Services 1 18 18 Other Industries 1 12 13 681 320 1,001 Total 11 Direct output was calculated based on a four-year average between 2013 and 2016, in 2016 dollars. 12 Utilities sector includes direct employment at Cooper Nuclear Station in Nebraska and secondary employment from the rest of Nebraska to support the operations. Page 26 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1164 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 7 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute February 2018 COMMUNITY LEADERSHIP AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION In addition to the economic benefits Nebraska Public Power District contributes to the region in the form of jobs, income and economic output, NPPD and its employees play a major role in the health and welfare of the community. Cooper employees are involved in local community organizations, providing both voluntary and financial support. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Community leadership Cooper employees are active members of their communities. They serve on city councils, coach athletic teams, and own local businesses. Cooper staff are engaged in local philanthropic events and responding to local community needs during such events as storms and floods. Cooper employees also volunteer in community parades, local chamber of commerce chili cook-offs, holiday angel tree gift donations and school science fairs. School programs Cooper Nuclear Station is directly involved with the Energy Generation Operations Program at Southeast Community College (SECC) in Milford, Nebraska. The program began in 2008 as a way to train future operators and has emerged into a successful program that gives students hands-on operations training at the plant site. The students are prepared for employment at a nuclear power plant during the two-year program. NPPD continually provides opportunities to the students through tours, job shadowing experiences and recruitment upon graduation. NPPD’s energy education team and communication professionals bring presentations to schools and local civic groups to educate them about the benefits of nuclear power and Cooper’s support for the community. NPPD in 2017 set up its mobile science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) lab at Johnson High School for two weeks. Students and teachers took time to explore the lab, create, engineer, and experience job-related tasks to understand the importance and excitement of a career in the energy industry. The mobile STEM lab is complemented by online curriculum models, in-class presentations, robotic interactions with students and a statewide robotics program. At least 400 middle and high school students in five schools from around Cooper participated in one or more of Cooper’s energy education activities in 2017. Site tours NPPD encourages facility tours among its community. Cooper employees host the Nebraska LEAD Program, where members of the Nebraska Agriculture Leadership Council tour Cooper as part of the program’s educational site visits. Cooper has hosted representatives from Japan, as well as the USS Nebraska (SSBN-739), a nuclear-powered, Ohio-class submarine. Cooper conducts about 20 tours of the station every year, including tours for the Nebraska National Guard, local law enforcement, state dignitaries, international visitors, and local schools and colleges. Page 27 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1164 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 8 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute Plant Neighbor Survey A recent survey13 conducted for the Cooper Nuclear Station showed exceptional support from local residents, compared to the benchmarks from other nuclear power plants. The results are comparable to the same survey conducted in 2011. Ninety-two percent of Cooper’s neighbors have a favorable impression of the plant and its recent operations; 71 percent have a very favorable impression. In addition, 88 percent of Cooper’s neighbors favor nuclear energy. Respondents indicated their support for Cooper is based on perceptions of the plant’s safe operations and their favorable view of NPPD regarding economic impact, jobs, safety, community outreach and environmental protection. The survey also found: • 94 percent of respondents are confident in NPPD’s ability to operate a nuclear power plant safely. • 93 percent of Cooper’s neighbors believe nuclear energy will be important to meeting the nation’s electricity needs. • 93 percent said NPPD is doing a good job of protecting the environment. • 84 percent feel somewhat well informed about nuclear energy. • 72 percent believe people living near a nuclear plant are unlikely to be exposed to harmful levels of radiation. February 2018 ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP There has been no significant environmental impact recorded at Cooper Nuclear Station. NPPD's environmental stewardship is multifaceted, including such initiatives as developing wetlands and participating in pollinator programs in the area around Cooper. The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program at Cooper monitors radiation in ambient air, drinking water, river water, farm animal milk samples, soil, sediment, river fish and local vegetation. Samples are analyzed by an independent vendor and the results are provided to the public and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The results have never exceeded regulatory limits. Fire Brigade and Emergency Medical Technicians Cooper employs nearly 100 individuals who serve as members of the on-site fire brigade or who are certified as emergency medical technicians (EMTs). Additionally, all Cooper employees are trained to perform first responder duties in the event of an emergency. NPPD’s Hazardous Material Emergency Response Plan also identifies specifically trained individuals and teams to respond to particular events (such as spills, fires or medical emergencies), if required. This dedication to safety expands beyond Cooper. Members of its fire brigade also support their local fire departments, and Cooper’s EMTs serve on area response crews. They also participate in and lead training courses for area fire departments and rescue squads. 13 The survey was conducted by Bisconti Research Inc. and Quest Global Research in the fall of 2017. Approximately 250 people living within 10 miles of Cooper Nuclear Station were surveyed. The purpose of the survey was to measure the opinions of local residents about the plant as a neighbor, employer and economic engine. Page 28 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1164 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 9 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute Emergency Preparedness Plan Cooper's operations always prioritize safety. NPPD partners with the states of Nebraska and Missouri to ensure the public safety is always top of mind. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission carefully regulates and tests the validity of Cooper’s emergency preparedness plan, designed to protect public health and safety in the unlikely event of an incident. High training standards and well-qualified staff demonstrate NPPD’s commitment to ensure that the physical environment is safe for all residents. Members of Cooper's emergency response organization are annually tested and qualified to perform their roles. Cooper tests its emergency response plan multiple times throughout the year. Exercises and drills are conducted both on-site and in partnership with the Nebraska Emergency Management Agency and the State of Missouri Emergency Management Agency, as well as county, state and local law enforcement, and regulatory entities such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the NRC. Cooper provides both emergency information and an in-home radio alert system to residents living within a 10-mile radius of the plant. NPPD's call center also is part of Cooper's emergency response organization and will answer calls 24x7. As a statewide utility, NPPD uses Cooper’s emergency response plan as a reference for similar crisis preparations, including its cyber security response plan, emergency restoration exercises, and its participation in the national Grid Ex exercise. February 2018 Personnel qualifications Cooper’s Fitness for Duty Program ensures employees are qualified to access the site. Employees are hired after a stringent background check and drug screening. NPPD conducts random daily drug tests to measure and monitor employee performance. Cooper is home to the Cooper Nuclear Station Learning Center which provides comprehensive training for employees on a variety of industry and operational programs. A specially-designed simulator of the power plant’s control room assists in training NPPD personnel to operate the plant in both normal and emergency conditions. Every Cooper reactor operator must undergo extensive training to earn an operator license from the NRC, and ongoing training is required to maintain a reactor operators' license. Industry Performance and Regulatory Standing Cooper Nuclear Station is a member of the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) and benefits from the organization’s evaluation and benchmarking processes. The mission of INPO is to “promote the highest level of safety and reliability—to promote excellence—in the performance of commercial nuclear power plants." Cooper continues to perform in the highest category of the NRC's Reactor Oversight Process Action Matrix. Page 29 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1164 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 10 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute February 2018 ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY This analysis uses the REMI PI+ version 2.1.5 model to estimate the economic and fiscal impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station. REGIONAL ECONOMIC MODELS INC. 1. Input/output tabulation (IO)—IO models, sometimes called “social accounting matrices” (SAM), quantify the interrelation of industries and households in a computational sense. It models the flow of goods between firms in supply chains, wages paid to households, and final consumption by households, governments and the international market. These channels create the “multiplier” effect of $1 going further. The REMI model has two main purposes: forecasting and analysis of alternatives. All models have a “baseline” forecast of the future of a regional economy at the county level. Using “policy variables,” in REMI terminology, provides scenarios based on different situations. The ability to model policy variables makes it a powerful tool for conveying the economic “story” behind policy. The model translates various considerations into understandable concepts like gross domestic product and jobs. 2. Computable general equilibrium (CGE)—CGE modeling adds market concepts to the IO structure. This includes how IO structures evolve over time and how they respond to alternative policies. CGE incorporates concepts on markets for labor, housing, consumer goods, imports and the importance of competitiveness to fostering economic growth over time. Changing one of these will influence the others—for instance, a new knife factory would improve the labor market by increasing migration into the area, driving housing and rent prices higher, and inducing the market to create a new subdivision to return to “market clearing” conditions. Regional Economic Models Inc. (REMI), headquartered in Amherst, Massachusetts, is a modeling firm specializing in services related to economic impacts and policy analysis. It provides software, support services, and issue-based expertise and consulting in almost every state, the District of Columbia, and other countries in North America, Europe, Latin America, the Middle East and Asia. REMI relies on data from public sources, including the Bureau of Economic Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Energy Information Administration and the Census Bureau. Forecasts for future macroeconomic conditions in REMI come from a combination of resources, which serve as the main framework for the software model needed to perform simulations. POLICY INSIGHT PLUS REMI’s Policy Insight Plus (PI+) is a computerized, multiregional, dynamic model of the states or other subnational units of the United States economy. PI+ relies on four quantitative methodologies to guide its approach to economic modeling: 3. Econometrics—REMI uses statistical parameters and historical data to populate the numbers inside the IO and CGE portions. The estimation of the different parameters, elasticity terms and figures gives the strength of various responses. It also gives the “time-lags” from the beginning of a policy to the point where markets have had a chance to clear. 4. New economic geography—Economic geography provides REMI a sense of economies of scale and agglomeration. It quantifies the strength of clusters in an area and their influence on productivity in that sector. The concentrated labor in an area is specialized to serve companies, thus, their longterm productivity grows more quickly than that of smaller regions with no proclivity in that sector. Page 30 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1164 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 11 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute February 2018 CONCLUSION ECONOMIC AND EMPLOYMENT IMPACTS NEI’s analysis finds that Cooper generates more than $112 million in annual economic output in Nebraska through its continued operations. This includes over $66 million for the five counties surrounding the station (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe and Richardson) and more than $46 million for the rest of Nebraska. NEI’s analysis also finds that Cooper supports more than 1,000 jobs annually, which includes 680 jobs in the five counties and more than 320 jobs in the rest of Nebraska from continued operations. FURTHER BENEFITS OF COOPER The station’s economic benefits—through wages and purchases of supplies and services—are considerable. In addition, plant employees further stimulate the local economy by purchasing goods and services from businesses around the area, supporting many small businesses in Nebraska. The facility generated 6.9 million megawatt-hours of carbon-free electricity in 2017, enough to serve the yearly needs for hundreds of thousands of homes. Cooper Nuclear Station is an important contributor to NPPD's generation portfolio, serving the energy needs of Nebraskans with carbon-free and reliable electricity. Page 31 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1164 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute February 2018 1201 F Street, NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 nei.org Page 32 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5790 From: Pope, Patrick L. To: EPC List Cc: Bcc: Subject: FW: PTC Victory Date: Fri Feb 09 2018 18:47:01 CST Attachments: image001.jpg image002.jpg FYI. Pat (402) 469-4436 – cell Safety & Security – See something? SAY something! From: KORSNICK, Maria [mailto:mgk@nei.org] Sent: Friday, February 09, 2018 1:32 PM Cc: GRP. ELT Subject: PTC Victory **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ To: NEI Board of Directors Members of NEI Advisory Committees In the early hours of the morning, the House and Senate passed a budget deal to fund the government through March 23. Included in the final package was the extension of the nuclear Production Tax Credit (PTC). NEI and our member companies have been working for years, with a significant effort in the current Congress, to get the PTC revised. Along the way, we saw victories and defeats. Thanks to truly tireless efforts, the industry ultimately prevailed. (NEI’s press statement.) Page 33 of 408 Significant attention has been placed on the PTC as crucial to the completion of Vogtle 3 and 4. The PTC will also benefit a number of our member companies, including NuScale and others developing SMRs. Of equal importance is the signal that the PTC passage sends about the support for nuclear in the United States. In order for us to maintain our global leadership as an industry, these actions from Congress demonstrate a commitment to the current fleet as well as new construction and new technologies. This is a truly significant and lasting victory for the nuclear industry! Maria MARIA KORSNICK President and Chief Executive Officer 1201 F Street NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 P: 202.739.8187 M: 410.456.0756 E: mgk@nei.org nei.org This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 34 of 408 Page 35 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5790-000001 Owner: Pope, Patrick L. Filename: image001.jpg Last Modified: Fri Feb 09 18:47:01 CST 2018 Page 36 of 408 image001.jpg for Printe em: 1166 Int 1 of 2) Document ID: 0.7.395.5790-000002 Owner: Pope, Patrick L. Filename: image002.jpg Last Modified: Fri Feb 09 18:47:01 CST 2018 Page 38 of 408 ge image002.jpg for Printe em: 11661 Nt Int 2 of 2) of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5780 From: Nuclear Energy Overview To: Kent, Thomas J. Cc: Bcc: Subject: Nuclear Energy Overview - Feb. 8, 2018 Date: Fri Feb 09 2018 07:35:31 CST Attachments: **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Nuclear Energy Overview February 8, 2018 This week's top story — NEI CEO Says US in Danger of Ceding Nuclear Technology Leadership Feb. 8, 2018—NEI President and CEO Maria Korsnick said the U.S. is in danger of losing its technological leadership in commercial nuclear energy to major rivals if more is not done to properly value and support the technology domestically during a hearing on Capitol Hill. Other Stories this week — *Nuclear Industry Moves Forward on Accident Tolerant Fuels *Argonne's Jeff Binder on How Tech Can Revitalize Nuclear Energy You can view Overview by clicking here. _____ Nuclear Energy Overview's daily news service provides the latest information on industry topics, legistation and more. For news as it happens, bookmark the NEO page and check frequently for new content. Or click for a roll-up of this week's stories in PDF format. Nuclear Energy Institute _____ Your questions, comments, suggestions or any additions to the mailing list are welcome. We can be reached at overview@nei.org. We look forward to hearing from you. For more information, visit www.nei.org. Unsubscribe from these messages. Page 40 of 408 twitter facebook You Tube RSS Flickr Blogger This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Page 41 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.34724 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. To: EPC List ; MPC List Cc: Corporate Communication/Government Affairs List ; Lemke, Kenneth M. ; Plettner, Mary M. Bcc: Subject: FW: Cooper Economic Impact Report - final Date: Thu Feb 08 2018 11:15:30 CST Attachments: image001.jpg See attached. The Nuclear Energy Institute has finalized the economic impact study and we have reviewed. They will be posting it to their website soon and we will be developing communications around it to share publicly, but I wanted you to have a copy. Please let me know if you have any questions. Jeanne Schieffer Corporate Communications & Public Relations Manager Nebraska Public Power District 1414 15th Street Columbus, NE 68601 402.563.5990 – o 402.910.2313 – c jkschie@nppd.com From: DESAI, Harsh [mailto:hsd@nei.org] Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2018 10:57 AM To: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Subject: Cooper Economic Impact Report - final Importance: High Page 42 of 408 **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Hi Jeanne, I’ll forward the link on NEI website shortly! Thank you, Harsh Harsh S. Desai Manager, Energy & Economic Analyses P: 202.739.8009 M: 202.344.9035 hsd@nei.org 1201 F Street, NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 GlobalMeet: https://nei.globalmeet.com/HarshDesai Conference Line: 1-888-450-5996 (Passcode: 957397) This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 43 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.34724-000001 Owner: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Filename: image001.jpg Last Modified: Thu Feb 08 11:15:30 CST 2018 Page 44 of 408 image001.jpg for Printe em: 1170 Int 1 of 1) Document ID: 0.7.395.5764 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. To: EPC List ; MPC List Cc: Corporate Communication/Government Affairs List ; Lemke, Kenneth M. ; Plettner, Mary M. Bcc: Subject: FW: Cooper Economic Impact Report - final Date: Thu Feb 08 2018 11:15:30 CST Attachments: Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf image001.jpg See attached. The Nuclear Energy Institute has finalized the economic impact study and we have reviewed. They will be posting it to their website soon and we will be developing communications around it to share publicly, but I wanted you to have a copy. Please let me know if you have any questions. Jeanne Schieffer Corporate Communications & Public Relations Manager Nebraska Public Power District 1414 15th Street Columbus, NE 68601 402.563.5990 – o 402.910.2313 – c jkschie@nppd.com From: DESAI, Harsh [mailto:hsd@nei.org] Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2018 10:57 AM To: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Subject: Cooper Economic Impact Report - final Importance: High Page 46 of 408 **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Hi Jeanne, I’ll forward the link on NEI website shortly! Thank you, Harsh Harsh S. Desai Manager, Energy & Economic Analyses P: 202.739.8009 M: 202.344.9035 hsd@nei.org 1201 F Street, NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 GlobalMeet: https://nei.globalmeet.com/HarshDesai Conference Line: 1-888-450-5996 (Passcode: 957397) This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 47 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5764-000001 Owner: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Filename: Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf Last Modified: Thu Feb 08 11:15:30 CST 2018 Page 48 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1172 ( Attachment 1 of 2) ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE COOPER NUCLEAR STATION AN ANALYSIS BY THE NUCLE AR ENERGY INSTITUTE FEBRUARY 2018 Page 49 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1172 ( Attachment 1 of 2) 1 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute February 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary.................................................................................................... 2 Historical Background................................................................................................ 4 State and Regional Benefits.................................................................................... 5 Community Leadership and Environmental Protection................................... 7 Economic Impact Analysis Methodology.......................................................... 10 Conclusion.................................................................................................................... 11 © 2018 Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc., Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station all rights reserved. Photo credits: Nebraska Public Power District, Shutterstock, flickr/Richard Bauer, flickr/John Carrel, flickr/Ali Eminov No part of this report may be reproduced, transmitted or modified without written permission of the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. Page 50 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1172 ( Attachment 1 of 2) 2 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute Cooper’s operations support more than February 2018 Cooper provides more than 1,000 Nebraska jobs, $112 million annually 680 jobs $66 million including more than in its 5 neighboring counties in state economic output, including in its 5 neighboring counties EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Cooper Nuclear Station (Cooper), located along the Missouri River in the southeast corner of Nebraska, has long been a vital part of the region’s energy portfolio, providing reliable electricity since it began operating in 1974. In addition to this reliable, carbonfree electricity, the plant supports hundreds of direct jobs. Employee involvement in their community also makes Cooper a significant social and economic contributor to Nebraska. Cooper is Nebraska’s largest single source of carbon-free electricity. To quantify the economic impacts of this facility in Nebraska, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) conducted an independent analysis. Based on data provided by Nebraska Public Power District (Cooper’s owner/operator) on employment and operating expenditures, NEI conducted the analysis using the PI+ model provided by Regional Economic Models Inc. (REMI), a nationally recognized model. KEY FINDINGS Cooper’s operations provide: Employment benefits Cooper supports hundreds of jobs in the five counties surrounding the plant (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe and Richardson) and the rest of Nebraska through its operations. NEI estimates that the total number of jobs supported by Cooper annually is more than 1,000. That includes more than 680 jobs in the five counties surrounding the plant and 320 jobs in the rest of Nebraska. These employment numbers include direct and additional jobs created as a result of the expenditures from Cooper operations. more than $66 million for the five counties surrounding the plant and more than $46 million for the rest of Nebraska. While there are economic benefits to other states, particularly in nearby Missouri and Iowa, this study focused on the state of Nebraska. Economic stimulus Cooper produces significant economic benefits for Nebraska through its plant operations. NEI’s analysis finds that Cooper generates more than $112 million in annual economic output (value added), which includes 2018 total estimated economic benefits for the Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe and Richardson counties surrounding the Cooper Nuclear Station include: • $66 million in economic output from plant operations • $63 million increase in gross state product • $70 million in disposable personal income 2018 estimated economic benefits for the rest of Nebraska include: • $46 million in economic output from plant operations • $26 million increase in gross state product • $32 million in disposable personal income Page 51 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1172 ( Attachment 1 of 2) 3 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute Cooper prevents CO2 emissions equal to approximately 1.4 million cars each year Long-term economic stimulus This study finds that between 2018 and 2034 (60-year license expiration date), Cooper’s operations will generate more than $1.9 billion in economic output for Nebraska, including $1.2 billion to the five counties surrounding the plant and an additional $675 million in the rest of Nebraska. Clean electricity for Nebraska Cooper’s operations generate carbon-free clean electricity. Cooper prevents the release of more than 6.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually,1 the same amount released by approximately 1.4 million cars every year.2 For perspective, there are an estimated 733,000 passenger cars in Nebraska.3 February 2018 Cooper’s operation will result in more than $1.9 billion in economic benefits for Nebraska between 2018 and 2034 Reliability benefits As part of the Nebraska Public Power District's fleet of generating facilities, Cooper provides 820 MWs of reliable, carbon-free electricity. During the past five years, the station operated at more than 93 percent of capacity,4 on par with the industry average and significantly higher than other forms of electricity generation. This reliable production helps offset potential price volatility of other energy sources (e.g., natural gas) and the intermittency of renewable electricity sources. 1 Emissions prevented are calculated using the weighted average CO2 emissions rate (2,095 lbs/MWh) for the Midwest Reliability Organization region, provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Nebraska Public Power District reported electricity generation of 6.9 million MWh in 2017 from Cooper. 2 Calculated using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator. https://www.epa.gov/energy/ greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator . 3 Retrieved using January 2017 release of the highway statistics from the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. 4 Retrieved using ABB Velocity Suite, which sourced the data from U.S. Energy Information Administration. Page 52 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1172 ( Attachment 1 of 2) 4 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute February 2018 Cooper Nuclear Station • Type: Boiling water reactor • Commencement of commercial operation in 1974 • Located along the Missouri River in SE Nebraska • 60 year license expires in 2034 • Total gross electricity capacity: 820 MW HISTORICAL BACKGROUND Cooper Nuclear Station is located along the Missouri River in the southeast corner of Nebraska. It consists of one boiling water reactor that produces 820 megawatts (MW) of carbon-free baseload power. Cooper Nuclear Station is owned and operated by Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) and supplies the electric grid through the Southwest Power Pool, a regional transmission organization. Cooper is named after Humboldt, Nebraska, natives Guy Cooper Sr. and Guy Cooper Jr. in recognition of their contribution to public power in Nebraska. Cooper began commercial operation in 1974 under an initial 40-year operating license, which was renewed in 2010 by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for an additional 20 years. Its current license expiration is in 2034. THOUSANDS OF LOCAL JOBS Cooper employs approximately 680 people, with more than 550 of them living in Nebraska.6 The annual payroll and benefits are more than $76 million for permanent employees and contractors, including over $60 million in the five counties surrounding the plant and more than $2.8 million in the rest of Nebraska. Most jobs at nuclear power plants require technical training and are typically among the highest-paying jobs in the area. Nationwide, nuclear energy jobs pay 36 percent more than average salaries in a plant’s local area.7 SAFE AND CLEAN FOR THE ENVIRONMENT RELIABLE ELECTRICITY GENERATION Generating clean energy is an important step in reducing the effects of climate change and vital to protecting the environment for current and future generations. Nuclear energy facilities generate large amount of electricity without emitting greenhouse gases. State and federal policymakers recognize nuclear energy as an essential source of safe, reliable electricity that meets both environmental needs and demand for electricity. As the sole nuclear power plant in Nebraska, Cooper generated more than 6.9 million megawatt-hours in 2017,5 a new record for the plant. This results in Cooper providing power to over 385,000 Nebraskans during a nonrefueling outage year like 2017. Refueling outages occur every 24 months, with the next one scheduled for fall 2018. Cooper, like all nuclear power plants, produces baseload power that is carbon-free. Cooper avoids the emission of over 6.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually, the same amount released by approximately 1.4 million cars every year. For perspective, there are an estimated 733,000 passenger cars in Nebraska. Cooper also prevented the release of other air pollutants–over 7,900 short tons of sulfur dioxide8 and more than 5,590 short tons of nitrogen oxide9 —which are precursors to acid rain and urban smog. 5 Nebraska Public Power District reported the 2017 electricity 8 Emissions prevented are calculated using the weighted Cooper operated at a capacity factor of over 93 percent over the last five years.4 Capacity factor, a measure of electricity production efficiency, is the ratio of actual electricity generated to the maximum possible electric generation during the year. generation to via U.S. Energy Information Administration Form EIA-923. 6 Nebraska Public Power District provided 2016 actual employment numbers. 7 “Nuclear Energy’s Economic Benefits—Current and Future.” Nuclear Energy Institute, 2014. average sulfur dioxide emissions rate (2.2994 lbs/MWh) for the Midwest Reliability Organization region, provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 9 Emissions prevented are calculated using the weighted average nitrogen oxide emissions rate (1.6203 lbs/MWh) for the Midwest Reliability Organization region, provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Page 53 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1172 ( Attachment 1 of 2) 5 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute February 2018 STATE AND REGIONAL BENEFITS NEI used the REMI PI+ model (version 2.1.5) to analyze economic and expenditure data provided by NPPD to develop estimates of its economic benefits from Cooper Nuclear Station’s operations. More information on REMI can be found on page 10. The economic impacts of Cooper discussed in this section consist of the following variables that are used to analyze these impacts: Output Output, in this context, refers to the economic activity generated by Cooper Nuclear Station. The direct output is the economic activity produced by the facility. The secondary output is the value of the economic activity generated in other industries because of Cooper, as well as how people employed at the facility influence the demand for goods and services within the region. Employment The direct employment is the number of jobs at Cooper. Secondary employment is jobs in other industries as a result of Cooper’s operations. Gross state product Cooper contributes to Nebraska’s gross state product, which the REMI model calculates as value of goods and services produced by labor and property—minus intermediate goods. For a nuclear plant, electricity is the final good. The intermediate goods are the components purchased to make that electricity. Disposable personal income Cooper contributes a significant sum to Nebraska’s disposable personal income, which is one of the indicators used by economists to monitor the state of the economy. Disposable personal income identifies the available household money for spending and saving after accounting for the income taxes. Reliable power The reliable availability of Cooper’s power is critical to such things as national security and regional grid stability. Commercial businesses, industries, and manufacturing facilities which require power 24 hours a day, seven days a week also benefit from Cooper’s constant supply of electricity. STATE AND REGIONAL ECONOMIC EFFECTS Cooper’s total 2018 annual economic output impact on Nebraska is estimated to be over $112 million in direct and secondary impact, including over $66 million to the five counties surrounding the plant (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe and Richardson) and more than $46 million for the rest of Nebraska. Cooper contributes more than $89 million to Nebraska’s gross state product in 2018, including $63 million to the five counties and over $25 million to the rest of Nebraska. Cooper also contributes approximately $102 million to Nebraska’s disposable personal income in 2018, including $70 million to the five counties and $32 million to the rest of Nebraska. Table 1 summarizes the plant’s effects on the five counties and the rest of Nebraska’s economies, the gross state product and disposable personal income in 2018 from operations. Cooper’s operations have substantial economic impact on other industries. Cooper’s output also stimulates the state’s and region’s labor income and employment. The plant employs approximately 528 people in permanent and contracting jobs in the five counties and 23 people in the rest of Nebraska.10 These jobs stimulate over 450 additional jobs in the five counties and the rest of Nebraska. Table 2 details the quantity and types of jobs that Cooper supports. Plant workers are included in the table’s utility occupation category. LONG-TERM ECONOMIC BENEFITS This study finds that between 2018 and 2034 (the 60-year license expiration date), Cooper’s operations will generate over $1.9 billion in economic output to Nebraska, including $1.2 billion to the five counties surrounding the plant and an additional $675 million in the rest of the state. 10 NPPD provided the 2016 actual employment numbers. Cooper also hires approximately 130 people across Iowa, Missouri and elsewhere, however the numbers were not utilized for the purpose of this Nebraska-based study. Page 54 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1172 ( Attachment 1 of 2) Table 1 COOPER’S ECONOMIC IMPACT (dollars in 2016 millions) Direct and Secondary Economic Output11 Description 2018 2018 to 2034 Output $66 $1,239 Gross State Product $63 Disposable Personal Income $70 (license expiration) Five counties surrounding the plant (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe and Richardson) Rest of Nebraska Output $215 Gross State Product $25 Disposable Personal Income $32 $675 Table 2 JOB IMPACTS FROM COOPER OPERATIONS Category Five Neighboring Counties Rest of Nebraska Total Utilities12 528 23 551 Retail Trade 81 64 145 Other Services (except public administration) 19 35 54 Health Care, Social Assistance 16 57 73 Accommodation, Food Services 14 26 40 Finance, Insurance 9 16 25 Construction 6 10 16 Wholesale Trade 2 11 13 Professional, Scientific, Technical Services 1 19 20 Arts, Entertainment, Recreation 1 7 8 Manufacturing 1 6 7 Real Estate, Rental and Leasing 1 9 10 Transportation, Warehousing 1 6 7 Administrative, Waste Management Services 1 18 18 Other Industries 1 12 13 681 320 1,001 Total 11 Direct output was calculated based on a four-year average between 2013 and 2016, in 2016 dollars. 12 Utilities sector includes direct employment at Cooper Nuclear Station in Nebraska and secondary employment from the rest of Nebraska to support the operations. Page 55 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1172 ( Attachment 1 of 2) 7 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute February 2018 COMMUNITY LEADERSHIP AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION In addition to the economic benefits Nebraska Public Power District contributes to the region in the form of jobs, income and economic output, NPPD and its employees play a major role in the health and welfare of the community. Cooper employees are involved in local community organizations, providing both voluntary and financial support. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Community leadership Cooper employees are active members of their communities. They serve on city councils, coach athletic teams, and own local businesses. Cooper staff are engaged in local philanthropic events and responding to local community needs during such events as storms and floods. Cooper employees also volunteer in community parades, local chamber of commerce chili cook-offs, holiday angel tree gift donations and school science fairs. School programs Cooper Nuclear Station is directly involved with the Energy Generation Operations Program at Southeast Community College (SECC) in Milford, Nebraska. The program began in 2008 as a way to train future operators and has emerged into a successful program that gives students hands-on operations training at the plant site. The students are prepared for employment at a nuclear power plant during the two-year program. NPPD continually provides opportunities to the students through tours, job shadowing experiences and recruitment upon graduation. NPPD’s energy education team and communication professionals bring presentations to schools and local civic groups to educate them about the benefits of nuclear power and Cooper’s support for the community. NPPD in 2017 set up its mobile science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) lab at Johnson High School for two weeks. Students and teachers took time to explore the lab, create, engineer, and experience job-related tasks to understand the importance and excitement of a career in the energy industry. The mobile STEM lab is complemented by online curriculum models, in-class presentations, robotic interactions with students and a statewide robotics program. At least 400 middle and high school students in five schools from around Cooper participated in one or more of Cooper’s energy education activities in 2017. Site tours NPPD encourages facility tours among its community. Cooper employees host the Nebraska LEAD Program, where members of the Nebraska Agriculture Leadership Council tour Cooper as part of the program’s educational site visits. Cooper has hosted representatives from Japan, as well as the USS Nebraska (SSBN-739), a nuclear-powered, Ohio-class submarine. Cooper conducts about 20 tours of the station every year, including tours for the Nebraska National Guard, local law enforcement, state dignitaries, international visitors, and local schools and colleges. Page 56 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1172 ( Attachment 1 of 2) 8 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute Plant Neighbor Survey A recent survey13 conducted for the Cooper Nuclear Station showed exceptional support from local residents, compared to the benchmarks from other nuclear power plants. The results are comparable to the same survey conducted in 2011. Ninety-two percent of Cooper’s neighbors have a favorable impression of the plant and its recent operations; 71 percent have a very favorable impression. In addition, 88 percent of Cooper’s neighbors favor nuclear energy. Respondents indicated their support for Cooper is based on perceptions of the plant’s safe operations and their favorable view of NPPD regarding economic impact, jobs, safety, community outreach and environmental protection. The survey also found: • 94 percent of respondents are confident in NPPD’s ability to operate a nuclear power plant safely. • 93 percent of Cooper’s neighbors believe nuclear energy will be important to meeting the nation’s electricity needs. • 93 percent said NPPD is doing a good job of protecting the environment. • 84 percent feel somewhat well informed about nuclear energy. • 72 percent believe people living near a nuclear plant are unlikely to be exposed to harmful levels of radiation. February 2018 ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP There has been no significant environmental impact recorded at Cooper Nuclear Station. NPPD's environmental stewardship is multifaceted, including such initiatives as developing wetlands and participating in pollinator programs in the area around Cooper. The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program at Cooper monitors radiation in ambient air, drinking water, river water, farm animal milk samples, soil, sediment, river fish and local vegetation. Samples are analyzed by an independent vendor and the results are provided to the public and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The results have never exceeded regulatory limits. Fire Brigade and Emergency Medical Technicians Cooper employs nearly 100 individuals who serve as members of the on-site fire brigade or who are certified as emergency medical technicians (EMTs). Additionally, all Cooper employees are trained to perform first responder duties in the event of an emergency. NPPD’s Hazardous Material Emergency Response Plan also identifies specifically trained individuals and teams to respond to particular events (such as spills, fires or medical emergencies), if required. This dedication to safety expands beyond Cooper. Members of its fire brigade also support their local fire departments, and Cooper’s EMTs serve on area response crews. They also participate in and lead training courses for area fire departments and rescue squads. 13 The survey was conducted by Bisconti Research Inc. and Quest Global Research in the fall of 2017. Approximately 250 people living within 10 miles of Cooper Nuclear Station were surveyed. The purpose of the survey was to measure the opinions of local residents about the plant as a neighbor, employer and economic engine. Page 57 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1172 ( Attachment 1 of 2) 9 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute Emergency Preparedness Plan Cooper's operations always prioritize safety. NPPD partners with the states of Nebraska and Missouri to ensure the public safety is always top of mind. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission carefully regulates and tests the validity of Cooper’s emergency preparedness plan, designed to protect public health and safety in the unlikely event of an incident. High training standards and well-qualified staff demonstrate NPPD’s commitment to ensure that the physical environment is safe for all residents. Members of Cooper's emergency response organization are annually tested and qualified to perform their roles. Cooper tests its emergency response plan multiple times throughout the year. Exercises and drills are conducted both on-site and in partnership with the Nebraska Emergency Management Agency and the State of Missouri Emergency Management Agency, as well as county, state and local law enforcement, and regulatory entities such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the NRC. Cooper provides both emergency information and an in-home radio alert system to residents living within a 10-mile radius of the plant. NPPD's call center also is part of Cooper's emergency response organization and will answer calls 24x7. As a statewide utility, NPPD uses Cooper’s emergency response plan as a reference for similar crisis preparations, including its cyber security response plan, emergency restoration exercises, and its participation in the national Grid Ex exercise. February 2018 Personnel qualifications Cooper’s Fitness for Duty Program ensures employees are qualified to access the site. Employees are hired after a stringent background check and drug screening. NPPD conducts random daily drug tests to measure and monitor employee performance. Cooper is home to the Cooper Nuclear Station Learning Center which provides comprehensive training for employees on a variety of industry and operational programs. A specially-designed simulator of the power plant’s control room assists in training NPPD personnel to operate the plant in both normal and emergency conditions. Every Cooper reactor operator must undergo extensive training to earn an operator license from the NRC, and ongoing training is required to maintain a reactor operators' license. Industry Performance and Regulatory Standing Cooper Nuclear Station is a member of the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) and benefits from the organization’s evaluation and benchmarking processes. The mission of INPO is to “promote the highest level of safety and reliability—to promote excellence—in the performance of commercial nuclear power plants." Cooper continues to perform in the highest category of the NRC's Reactor Oversight Process Action Matrix. Page 58 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1172 ( Attachment 1 of 2) 10 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute February 2018 ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY This analysis uses the REMI PI+ version 2.1.5 model to estimate the economic and fiscal impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station. REGIONAL ECONOMIC MODELS INC. 1. Input/output tabulation (IO)—IO models, sometimes called “social accounting matrices” (SAM), quantify the interrelation of industries and households in a computational sense. It models the flow of goods between firms in supply chains, wages paid to households, and final consumption by households, governments and the international market. These channels create the “multiplier” effect of $1 going further. The REMI model has two main purposes: forecasting and analysis of alternatives. All models have a “baseline” forecast of the future of a regional economy at the county level. Using “policy variables,” in REMI terminology, provides scenarios based on different situations. The ability to model policy variables makes it a powerful tool for conveying the economic “story” behind policy. The model translates various considerations into understandable concepts like gross domestic product and jobs. 2. Computable general equilibrium (CGE)—CGE modeling adds market concepts to the IO structure. This includes how IO structures evolve over time and how they respond to alternative policies. CGE incorporates concepts on markets for labor, housing, consumer goods, imports and the importance of competitiveness to fostering economic growth over time. Changing one of these will influence the others—for instance, a new knife factory would improve the labor market by increasing migration into the area, driving housing and rent prices higher, and inducing the market to create a new subdivision to return to “market clearing” conditions. Regional Economic Models Inc. (REMI), headquartered in Amherst, Massachusetts, is a modeling firm specializing in services related to economic impacts and policy analysis. It provides software, support services, and issue-based expertise and consulting in almost every state, the District of Columbia, and other countries in North America, Europe, Latin America, the Middle East and Asia. REMI relies on data from public sources, including the Bureau of Economic Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Energy Information Administration and the Census Bureau. Forecasts for future macroeconomic conditions in REMI come from a combination of resources, which serve as the main framework for the software model needed to perform simulations. POLICY INSIGHT PLUS REMI’s Policy Insight Plus (PI+) is a computerized, multiregional, dynamic model of the states or other subnational units of the United States economy. PI+ relies on four quantitative methodologies to guide its approach to economic modeling: 3. Econometrics—REMI uses statistical parameters and historical data to populate the numbers inside the IO and CGE portions. The estimation of the different parameters, elasticity terms and figures gives the strength of various responses. It also gives the “time-lags” from the beginning of a policy to the point where markets have had a chance to clear. 4. New economic geography—Economic geography provides REMI a sense of economies of scale and agglomeration. It quantifies the strength of clusters in an area and their influence on productivity in that sector. The concentrated labor in an area is specialized to serve companies, thus, their longterm productivity grows more quickly than that of smaller regions with no proclivity in that sector. Page 59 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1172 ( Attachment 1 of 2) 11 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute February 2018 CONCLUSION ECONOMIC AND EMPLOYMENT IMPACTS NEI’s analysis finds that Cooper generates more than $112 million in annual economic output in Nebraska through its continued operations. This includes over $66 million for the five counties surrounding the station (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe and Richardson) and more than $46 million for the rest of Nebraska. NEI’s analysis also finds that Cooper supports more than 1,000 jobs annually, which includes 680 jobs in the five counties and more than 320 jobs in the rest of Nebraska from continued operations. FURTHER BENEFITS OF COOPER The station’s economic benefits—through wages and purchases of supplies and services—are considerable. In addition, plant employees further stimulate the local economy by purchasing goods and services from businesses around the area, supporting many small businesses in Nebraska. The facility generated 6.9 million megawatt-hours of carbon-free electricity in 2017, enough to serve the yearly needs for hundreds of thousands of homes. Cooper Nuclear Station is an important contributor to NPPD's generation portfolio, serving the energy needs of Nebraskans with carbon-free and reliable electricity. Page 60 of 408 Cooper - Economic Impact Report_final.pdf for Printed Item: 1172 ( Attachment 1 of 2) Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute February 2018 1201 F Street, NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 nei.org Page 61 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5764-000002 Owner: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Filename: image001.jpg Last Modified: Thu Feb 08 11:15:30 CST 2018 Page 62 of 408 image001.jpg for Printe em: 1172 Int 2 of 2) Document ID: 0.7.395.12051 From: BAWOROWSKY, Christina To: BAWOROWSKY, Christina ; daniel.walsh@nreca.coop ; renee.eastman@srpnet.com ; nicolas.quinones@srpnet.com ; dehende3@wcnoc.com ; apkavanagh@aep.com ; cadeegan@bechtel.com ; dave@kdindc.com ; Reddick, Darani ; Jackie Carney ; heather.teilhet@opc.com ; amy.pressler@edisonintl.com ; Voyles,, Seth- Omaha Public Power District ; daryl@owendc.com ; djs@ds2group.org ; sakopple@bwxt.com ; dwaterhouse@publicpower.org ; frank_gillespie@mnes-us.com ; tongour@tchgroup.com ; adsmith@energy-northwest.com ; lopattjt@westinghouse.com ; ryan.serote@srpnet.com ; pat.raffaniello@lobbydc.com ; lisa.decker@cengllc.com ; jake.a.hostrander@sargentlundy.com ; caseyhill@energysolutions.com ; tom.deponty@framatome.com ; crpierce@southernco.com ; amy.chiang@honeywell.com ; kelly.chapman@dominionenergy.com ; david.gilbert@exeloncorp.com ; colleen.moss@duke-energy.com ; sean@foxpotomac.com ; zane.corriveau@dteenergy.com ; summer.b.bravo@xcelenergy.com ; rkay@vistraenergy.com ; qiana.charles@sce.com ; Robert Capstick ; TUFTS, Julie ; plandrum@bgrdc.com Page 64 of 408 ; tom.ingram@ingramgroup.com ; KRAFT, Steven ; HANSON, Jerud ; clane@x-energy.com ; COHEN, Neal ; mike@mmathisgroup.com ; jpower@ameren.com ; POWERS, Robert ; bdr@dairynet.com ; Thomas Craig ; donise.cameron@pseg.com ; kathleen.etxegoien@hii-nns.com ; jcherbert@energy-northwest.com ; robbieaiken@pinnaclewest.com ; Julie.LaBella@talenenergy.com ; aalexanderjr@firstenergycorp.com ; ksteckelberg@eei.org ; yostpa@westinghouse.com ; Michael R. Tuosto ; andy.coulouris@dteenergy.com ; randi@kdindc.com ; oearenfight@bgrdc.com ; glen.tait@inl.gov ; martin.doern@xcelenergy.com ; lbickwit@milchev.com ; mjpaoli@energy-northwest.com ; jsharkey@southernco.com ; brandi@ingramgroup.com ; ewells@brgdc.com ; j8h1@pge.com ; jcdobken@energy-northwest.com ; jenny.dijames@align-strategies.com ; chris.mathey@exeloncorp.com ; joshua.madrigal@areva.com ; FINNERTY, Sean ; mjriith@southernco.com ; McClure, John C. ; BURNISON, Melissa ; sarah.chilton@inl.gov ; Jeff@millerstrategies.com ; jmweisgall@midamerican.com ; CSIZMADIA, Christine ; Page 65 of 408 stephen.l.plevniak@xcelenergy.com ; sdodd@smart-union.org ; charles@helenmilby.com ; slbaskerville@bpa.gov ; aecannon@aep.com ; jhwolak@southernco.com ; Michael.brairton@pseg.com ; howej@centrusenergy.com ; David C. Brown ; VAN VARICK, Lisa ; Tim Smith ; emily.duncan@exeloncorp.com ; carolyn.e.apostolou@hii-co.com ; bewilkinson@tva.gov ; Lake Barrett ; jeckard@firstenergycorp.com ; Vicki.Hull@dominionenergy.com ; MNEWTON@southernco.com ; sally.mcAllister@exeloncorp.com ; mike.beer@align-strategies.com ; jmlenard@tva.gov ; jmantz@bgrdc.com ; dwight.cates@fluor.com ; Pepper.natonski@duke-energy.com ; jcmaierhofer@tva.gov ; ctoth@publicpower.org ; stephen.marlo@aptim.com ; KORSNICK, Maria ; helen@helenmilby.com ; MANTSCH, Scott ; ELMORE, Baker ; bob.ekstrom@pinnaclewest.com ; BERRIGAN, Carol ; chuck@mmathisgroup.com ; paola.rozzi@aptim.com ; mlhall@firstenergycorp.com ; cory.hicks@fluor.com ; john.obrien@nrgenergy.com ; McGAREY, Michael ; Gorman Prochaska, Pamela ; branders@southernco.com ; bmadru@valhi.net ; adam@owendc.com ; sgarrison@ameren.com ; h1b6@pge.com ; CHARLES, Chris ; AUSTGEN, Kati Page 66 of 408 ; kristen.ludecke@pseg.com ; alexander.hoppes@areva.com ; DIV. Governmental Affairs ; pat.pettey@align-strategies.com ; elizabeth@meguirewhitney.com ; MARSHALL, Beverly ; david.marventano@fluor.com ; duvallsb@westinghouse.com ; cmount@firstenergycorp.com ; ricardo.bernal@aecom.com ; Jim Hickey ; maura.krautner@aptim.com ; bruce_burton@ibew.org ; michael.sewell@duke-energy.com ; agrealy@firstenergycorp.com ; paula@kdindc.com ; katie.ott@exeloncorp.com ; debra.raggio@talenenergy.com ; john.holt@nreca.coop ; lisa@kdindc.com ; Devin Horne ; rwcarter@bwxt.com ; Gilbert, David M:(BSC) ; Brian Rude ; Robbie.Aiken@pinnaclewest.com ; David Peluso ; MADRIGAL Joshua (Framatome) ; WEEKS, Sydney ; Randi Reid ; Paula Short ; Andy J Coulouris ; Amy Thomas Cc: Bcc: Subject: Date: Attachments: NEI Governmental Affairs Standing Committee February 13 at 9:30 AM Wed Feb 07 2018 09:22:10 CST StartTime: Tue Feb 13 08:30:00 Central Standard Time 2018 EndTime: Tue Feb 13 09:30:00 Central Standard Time 2018 Location: ***NEI Main Offices: 1201 F St NW Suite 1100 Clean Air A/B*** Recurring: No ShowReminder: No Accepted: No **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments Page 67 of 408 unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. ________________________________ To: NEI GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE NEI Governmental Affairs Standing Committee will meet next Tuesday, February 13, at 9:30 am. Please Note: We are holding this meeting at NEI’s Main Offices located at 1201 F St NW Suite 1100. Our guest speaker will be Michael Catanzaro, Special Assistant to the President for Domestic Energy and Environmental Policy. This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. ________________________________ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 68 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5744 From: Hadland, Harold L. To: Pope, Patrick L. ; Kent, Thomas J. Cc: McClure, John C. Bcc: Subject: NextEra Sues NEI, Citing Efforts to 'Distort Electric Energy Markets' Greentech Media. htm Date: Tue Feb 06 2018 09:51:43 CST Attachments: image001.jpg image002.jpg image003.png Nuclear NextEra Sues NEI, Citing Efforts to ‘Distort Electric Energy Markets’ The Nuclear Energy Institute is accused of “extortion,” creating a “false sense of panic,” and “maligning the operations of its members”—among other things. Julia Pyper February 05, 2018 X Julia Pyper Senior Editor Greentech Media Julia Pyper is a Senior Editor at Greentech Media covering clean energy policy, the solar industry, grid edge technologies and electric mobility. She previously reported for E&E Publishing, and has covered clean energy and climate change issues across the U.S. and abroad, including in Haiti, Israel and the Maldives. Julia holds degrees from McGill and Columbia Universities. Find her on Twitter @JMPyper. More articles from this author > The Florida-based utility recently withdrew from the nuclear energy trade group. Photo Credit: Shutterstock o 4 o NextEra Energy has filed a lawsuit against the Nuclear Energy Institute, accusing the trade group of taking “retaliatory action” in response to NextEra’s withdrawal from the organization. Page 69 of 408 Legal documents dated February 2 accuse the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) of breaching the Personnel Access Data System (PADS) agreement, which allows NextEra-owned companies to access a database of nuclear energy industry workers across the country. But while NextEra is seeking reimbursement for damages related to the database, the lawsuit speaks to a broader rift in the energy sector amid changes to the nation’s resource mix. NextEra companies, including Florida Power and Light, withdrew from NEI last month over the nuclear trade group’s “new agenda,” the lawsuit states. NextEra Energy operates eight nuclear reactors across the country, but it also holds a diverse portfolio of energy resources, including natural gas, solar and other renewable energies. Entergy, which operates 10 nuclear reactors across the U.S., also chose to leave NEI last month. The withdrawals come as the nuclear energy industry grapples with an uncertain future. Existing power plants continue to struggle with high maintenance and safety costs, while new reactors face crippling cost overruns, which has triggered a national debate on the ability for nuclear to compete with natural gas, solar and wind, and whether or not it’s worth investing in reliable, low-carbon nuclear power for strategic reasons. NEI’s decision to support Energy Secretary Rick Perry’s proposal to subsidize struggling coal and nuclear plants -- which was met with strong opposition from across the energy sector and ultimately rejected by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on January 8, 2018 -- sparked tensions with NextEra. The Florida-based energy giant also accused NEI of funding studies intended to generate support for nuclear at the expense of other forms of power. These recent policy changes advocated by NEI represent “bad energy policy” and could harm NextEra’s businesses, the strongly worded lawsuit states. “NEI recently has been vigorously advocating for irrational and unreasonable policies that would distort electric energy markets,” according to NextEra. “In this, NEI has also funded studies that call into question the reliability and costs of the electric system, attempting to create a false sense of panic and unfairly and incorrectly maligning the operations of its members, including the NextEra Companies.” The legal document continues: "NEI, rather than supporting nuclear, has undertaken, both overtly and covertly, efforts to undermine other generation resources -- again, implicitly implying and explicitly stating that diversity of generation, rather than making a system more reliable and lower cost, somehow is bad for the electric system. Without qualification, the NextEra Companies and NextEra disagree with this underlying thesis. As large nuclear generators, the NextEra Companies obviously support nuclear energy. But, the NextEra Companies cannot financially, or otherwise, support an organization that fundamentally mispresents the state of grid reliability in this country." NextEra claims that NEI revoked its ability to access to PADS, the nuclear industry personnel database, in retaliation for withdrawing from the trade group. U.S. nuclear plant operators came together in the mid-1990s to standardize the approach for processing of nuclear plant workers through the establishment of PADS, a central records repository containing authorization records for workers. The data system is intended to ensure safety and security at commercial nuclear facilities. According to NextEra, access to the list of qualified nuclear workers is critical ahead of scheduled plant shut downs, when the number of staff on hand can roughly double. Florida Power and Light’s St. Lucie plant is scheduled for an outage beginning on February 7, 2018, the lawsuits states. NextEra companies have a total of six outages planned in 2018. For more than two decades, FPL has contributed information to PADS and paid annual dues to maintain the system. Denying NextEra access to the system is “unjust” and violates terms of the PADS Page 70 of 408 agreement, given that participation may only be terminated with a minimum of three months, according to the complaint. The lawsuit states that on January 30, NEI said that it would permit the NextEra to access PADS through March 2018 if -- “and only if” -- NextEra agreed to pay the lobby group $860,000. The vast majority of that payment represents NEI membership fees unrelated to PADS, according to NextEra. The plaintiff also alleged that NEI was aware of the damage refusing access to PADS would cause, including shut down delays and lost pay for personnel, and attempted to leverage its control over the database to extract a monetary payment. “We think this was the very definition of extortion,” said Peter Robbins, a spokesman for NextEra Energy, in a phone interview. “We made a business decision to leave NEI; we thought they had not adapted to changing times. They are simply attempting to retaliate against us by trying to squeeze cash out of us and our customers.” NEI rejects the charges outright. Maria Korsnick, NEI president and CEO, said her organization “vehemently denies all of the allegations in NextEra’s lawsuit and will vigorously defend our position in court.” According to an emailed statement from Korsnick, NextEra lost the ability to participate in PADS upon choosing to discontinue its NEI membership. Nonetheless, NEI said it would supply NextEra with the PADS information “necessary to maintain strict compliance with the [Nuclear Regulatory Commission] regulations.” Korsnick said the information exchange has been accomplished and will continue. She went on to push back against NextEra’s “inflammatory statements.” “To call NEI’s approach retaliatory, or even suggest the notion of extortion, is both counter-factual and offensive to the good faith effort the offer represents,” Korsnick said. NEI recently contacted NextEra to open a dialogue that would “advance the industry’s interest in remaining unified, or as unified as possible, on regulatory and other policy positions.” NextEra’s response was to launch a “baseless” lawsuit, she said. With respect to the work NEI did in support of DOE’s notice of proposed rulemaking, Korsnick said the trade group conducted a rigorous information gathering process from its members to inform NEI’s policy position and acted accordingly. NEI currently has around 300 members in 17 countries, including U.S utilities American Electric Power, FirstEnergy, Duke Energy, Xcel energy and others. So while NextEra may not have agreed with NEI’s effort to support the continued operation of existing nuclear plants, the interests of its member companies guided the group’s work. “NEI remains committed to achieving its foundational mission: to preserve, sustain, innovate and grow the nuclear energy industry,” said Korsnick. “All of NEI’s actions should be and are consistent with that purpose.” Robbins underscored that NextEra is “absolutely committed” to nuclear power. He pointed out the company has been recognized for the safe and reliable operation of its five nuclear plants and eight reactors. “They’re an important part of our portfolio, just like renewable energy is,” he said. The lawsuit doesn’t have to do with NextEra’s nuclear plants, said Robbins. “It has to do with NEI itself.” o doe nopr o florida power & light o grid reliabilty Page 71 of 408 o nextera o nuclear energy institute o nuclear power White Papers U.S. Solar Outlook: Initial Reactions to Section 201 Decision DOWNLOAD > Utility Scale Central Inverters: Features That Matter and Best Practices DOWNLOAD > U.S. PV System Pricing H2 2017: Forecasts and Breakdowns GET REPORT NOW > U.S. Solar Market Insight: Q4 2017 GET REPORT NOW > Sign-Up for our Newsletter Thanks for signing up for GTM's Newsletter. Look out for a confirmation email and be sure to whitelist hello@greentechmedia.com to make sure you get our emails. Oh no! Close Page 72 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5744-000001 Owner: Hadland, Harold L. Filename: image001.jpg Last Modified: Tue Feb 06 09:51:43 CST 2018 Page 73 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5744-000002 Owner: Hadland, Harold L. Filename: image002.jpg Last Modified: Tue Feb 06 09:51:43 CST 2018 Page 75 of 408 . as. 3.2.. . w. . . 2 Document ID: 0.7.395.5744-000003 Owner: Hadland, Harold L. Filename: image003.png Last Modified: Tue Feb 06 09:51:43 CST 2018 Page 77 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.11943 From: Nuclear R&D Summit 2018 To: McClure, John C. Cc: Bcc: Subject: Time to Register for the Nuclear R&D Summit Date: Tue Feb 06 2018 08:27:56 CST Attachments: **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Don't miss out on the future of nuclear energy. Attend the Nuclear R&D Summit and learn about the future of nuclear research and development. NUCLEAR R&D SUMMIT Part of Nuclear Innovation Week March 6-7 Long View Gallery Washington, D.C. REGISTER SUMMIT TOPICS *Innovation and R&D *Light water reactors *New reactor support *Crosscutting initiatives *Nuclear infrastructure *Stable workforce CAN'T MISS EVENTS *Advocate on Capitol Hill *Millennial Nuclear Caucus event *Reception with award presentation WHO SHOULD ATTEND *Innovators *National lab employees Page 79 of 408 *Academia *New reactor developers *Policymakers *Influencers *Regulators REGISTER CONTACTS Program/Sponsors Harsh S. Desai Manager, Policy Development hsd@nei.org Logistics Arika Johnson Senior Manager, Conferences amj@nei.org Registrar Denise Bell Registrar registrar@nei.org Nuclear Energy Institute · 1201 F Street N.W. Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20004 · 202.739.8000 www.nei.org Unsubscribe from these messages. Page 80 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.11911 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. To: McClure, John C. ; Dentlinger, Courtney A. ; Becker, Mark C. Cc: Bcc: Subject: NEI Econ Report Date: Mon Feb 05 2018 15:54:29 CST Attachments: I just finished reviewing the latest draft of the NEI Econ Report. I have several ‘nits’ from Alan and Ken, along with my own ‘fixes.’ I think they made the changes I requested after John reviewed it, but I also know you will see some repetitiveness in the numbers and information. Ken also found the footnotes are not aligned with the info. Alan added a few more adjectives here and there, but didn’t change much. I wanted you to know I am not seeking big rewrites, but rather anything specific you know is wrong. If you can let me know by the morning, that is when I plan to talk to NEI again. I would like a quick turnaround from them, as I – at least – want to share the information with the LEAD fellows tour Cooper on Wednesday. (Ideally, I would like to hand out the report), but I spoke with NEI today and they may not be able to make that happen. Thanks. Jeanne Schieffer Corporate Communications & Public Relations Manager Nebraska Public Power District 1414 15th Street Columbus, NE 68601 402.563.5990 – o Page 81 of 408 402.910.2313 Page 82 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.34711 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. To: McClure, John C. Cc: Dentlinger, Courtney A. ; Becker, Mark C. Bcc: Subject: FW: Econ Report Date: Mon Feb 05 2018 12:53:38 CST Attachments: I will look through this again and cross reference what you had given me, John, and what I sent back to them last week. Ken Lemke is also reviewing. I would like us to finalize today if possible and ask NEI to post the report to their website tomorrow (if we all agree). Mark can get a gist of the report from this version to develop his press release. I don’t think the numbers will change, but Ken will determine for sure. Once we have the thumbs up, I can have hard copies made then by Mark Kunhart and Dan Zastera for distribution, too. Jeanne From: DESAI, Harsh [mailto:hsd@nei.org] Sent: Monday, February 05, 2018 12:33 PM To: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Subject: RE: Econ Report Importance: High **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Jeanne – here you go! Feedback from Jennifer Maloney (from our Comms on the photos): 1) the photo at the top is on Indian Cave State Park Page 83 of 408 2) the photo of the building is the Farmers Bank Building in Nebraska City. It is a former PO that was built in 1886 and refurbished is the 1980s. It wan a Presidential National Preservation Award. 3) The artwork also is from Nebraska City. There are a bunch of these statues around the city. It was a city project (like the pandas or the donkey/elephants in D.C.) These three photos we can use through Creative Commons, so copyrights are not an issue. We were unsure of the copyright situation of the photos Jeanne sent, so we prefer to use the ones that Karla chose. Thank you, Harsh O: 202-739-8009 M: 202-344-9035 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. [mailto:jkschie@nppd.com] Sent: Monday, February 5, 2018 8:53 AM To: DESAI, Harsh Subject: RE: Econ Report Thanks, Harsh. I had a voicemail from Jennifer and I hope we can connect today. I also pray things work out for NEI. What a crazy turn of events for you and the industry. From: DESAI, Harsh [mailto:hsd@nei.org] Sent: Monday, February 05, 2018 6:59 AM To: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Subject: RE: Econ Report **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Hi Jeanne – our apologies for the delay in getting this to you. Our Creative Studios has been slammed with a couple of issues (as you might have heard related to the membership), but we will have it to you by noon today for review. Page 84 of 408 Thank you, Harsh O: 202-739-8009 M: 202-344-9035 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. [mailto:jkschie@nppd.com] Sent: Sunday, February 4, 2018 10:20 PM To: DESAI, Harsh Subject: RE: Econ Report Hi, Harsh. How is the report coming? I will be in the office tomorrow, but out much of the rest of the week. Just wanted to check in and see if we can read through ONE MORE TIME before publishing. Thanks. Jeanne From: DESAI, Harsh [mailto:hsd@nei.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 6:41 PM To: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Subject: RE: Econ Report **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Page 85 of 408 I agree. Just wanted to make sure we supported your timeline. Monday gives us a bit of buffer as well. Plan is to have it put up on our NEI website, but we will not advertise. We will amplify anything you all share via social media. Would that work with you all? Or, are you planning to also post on your website. Thank you, Harsh O: 202-739-8009 M: 202-344-9035 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. [mailto:jkschie@nppd.com] Sent: Thursday, February 1, 2018 9:37 AM To: DESAI, Harsh Subject: RE: Econ Report I am out of the office on Friday. Is Monday okay? It’s a better day for media than a Friday. From: DESAI, Harsh [mailto:hsd@nei.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 6:34 PM To: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Subject: RE: Econ Report **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ If all is well, shall we plan for a release on Friday? Page 86 of 408 Thank you, Harsh O: 202-739-8009 M: 202-344-9035 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. [mailto:jkschie@nppd.com] Sent: Thursday, February 1, 2018 9:33 AM To: DESAI, Harsh Subject: RE: Econ Report Great!! From: DESAI, Harsh [mailto:hsd@nei.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 6:31 PM To: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Subject: RE: Econ Report **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Jeanne – my Creative Studio friends have indicated that they will have an updated report for us by tomorrow. Will share as soon as I have a copy and do a review myself. Thank you, Harsh O: 202-739-8009 M: 202-344-9035 Page 87 of 408 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. [mailto:jkschie@nppd.com] Sent: Friday, January 26, 2018 2:28 AM To: DESAI, Harsh Subject: RE: Econ Report Thanks, Harsh! From: DESAI, Harsh [mailto:hsd@nei.org] Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2018 11:23 AM To: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Subject: Re: Econ Report **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Hi Jeanne - our Creative Studios is going through and making several changes from you all and more we identified internally. They plan to have it to me by COB. I’ll forward as soon as I get it! Thank you, Harsh Sent from a mobile device with fast moving thumbs. -Harsh S. Desai M: 202-344-9035 O: 202-739-8009 hsd@nei.org On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 9:43 PM +0700, "Schieffer, Jeanne K." wrote: Page 88 of 408 Good morning, Harsh. Just wanted to check in to see how things were going. Thanks! Jeanne Schieffer Corporate Communications & Public Relations Manager Nebraska Public Power District 1414 15th Street Columbus, NE 68601 402.563.5990 – o 402.910.2313 – c jkschie@nppd.com This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any Page 89 of 408 attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to Page 90 of 408 another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 91 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.11878 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. To: McClure, John C. Cc: Dentlinger, Courtney A. ; Becker, Mark C. Bcc: Subject: FW: Econ Report Date: Mon Feb 05 2018 12:53:38 CST Attachments: DRAFT_Cooper_Economic_Impact_Report_rev4.pdf I will look through this again and cross reference what you had given me, John, and what I sent back to them last week. Ken Lemke is also reviewing. I would like us to finalize today if possible and ask NEI to post the report to their website tomorrow (if we all agree). Mark can get a gist of the report from this version to develop his press release. I don’t think the numbers will change, but Ken will determine for sure. Once we have the thumbs up, I can have hard copies made then by Mark Kunhart and Dan Zastera for distribution, too. Jeanne From: DESAI, Harsh [mailto:hsd@nei.org] Sent: Monday, February 05, 2018 12:33 PM To: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Subject: RE: Econ Report Importance: High **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Jeanne – here you go! Feedback from Jennifer Maloney (from our Comms on the photos): 1) the photo at the top is on Indian Cave State Park Page 92 of 408 2) the photo of the building is the Farmers Bank Building in Nebraska City. It is a former PO that was built in 1886 and refurbished is the 1980s. It wan a Presidential National Preservation Award. 3) The artwork also is from Nebraska City. There are a bunch of these statues around the city. It was a city project (like the pandas or the donkey/elephants in D.C.) These three photos we can use through Creative Commons, so copyrights are not an issue. We were unsure of the copyright situation of the photos Jeanne sent, so we prefer to use the ones that Karla chose. Thank you, Harsh O: 202-739-8009 M: 202-344-9035 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. [mailto:jkschie@nppd.com] Sent: Monday, February 5, 2018 8:53 AM To: DESAI, Harsh Subject: RE: Econ Report Thanks, Harsh. I had a voicemail from Jennifer and I hope we can connect today. I also pray things work out for NEI. What a crazy turn of events for you and the industry. From: DESAI, Harsh [mailto:hsd@nei.org] Sent: Monday, February 05, 2018 6:59 AM To: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Subject: RE: Econ Report **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Hi Jeanne – our apologies for the delay in getting this to you. Our Creative Studios has been slammed with a couple of issues (as you might have heard related to the membership), but we will have it to you by noon today for review. Page 93 of 408 Thank you, Harsh O: 202-739-8009 M: 202-344-9035 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. [mailto:jkschie@nppd.com] Sent: Sunday, February 4, 2018 10:20 PM To: DESAI, Harsh Subject: RE: Econ Report Hi, Harsh. How is the report coming? I will be in the office tomorrow, but out much of the rest of the week. Just wanted to check in and see if we can read through ONE MORE TIME before publishing. Thanks. Jeanne From: DESAI, Harsh [mailto:hsd@nei.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 6:41 PM To: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Subject: RE: Econ Report **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Page 94 of 408 I agree. Just wanted to make sure we supported your timeline. Monday gives us a bit of buffer as well. Plan is to have it put up on our NEI website, but we will not advertise. We will amplify anything you all share via social media. Would that work with you all? Or, are you planning to also post on your website. Thank you, Harsh O: 202-739-8009 M: 202-344-9035 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. [mailto:jkschie@nppd.com] Sent: Thursday, February 1, 2018 9:37 AM To: DESAI, Harsh Subject: RE: Econ Report I am out of the office on Friday. Is Monday okay? It’s a better day for media than a Friday. From: DESAI, Harsh [mailto:hsd@nei.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 6:34 PM To: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Subject: RE: Econ Report **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ If all is well, shall we plan for a release on Friday? Page 95 of 408 Thank you, Harsh O: 202-739-8009 M: 202-344-9035 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. [mailto:jkschie@nppd.com] Sent: Thursday, February 1, 2018 9:33 AM To: DESAI, Harsh Subject: RE: Econ Report Great!! From: DESAI, Harsh [mailto:hsd@nei.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 6:31 PM To: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Subject: RE: Econ Report **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Jeanne – my Creative Studio friends have indicated that they will have an updated report for us by tomorrow. Will share as soon as I have a copy and do a review myself. Thank you, Harsh O: 202-739-8009 M: 202-344-9035 Page 96 of 408 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. [mailto:jkschie@nppd.com] Sent: Friday, January 26, 2018 2:28 AM To: DESAI, Harsh Subject: RE: Econ Report Thanks, Harsh! From: DESAI, Harsh [mailto:hsd@nei.org] Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2018 11:23 AM To: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Subject: Re: Econ Report **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Hi Jeanne - our Creative Studios is going through and making several changes from you all and more we identified internally. They plan to have it to me by COB. I’ll forward as soon as I get it! Thank you, Harsh Sent from a mobile device with fast moving thumbs. -Harsh S. Desai M: 202-344-9035 O: 202-739-8009 hsd@nei.org On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 9:43 PM +0700, "Schieffer, Jeanne K." wrote: Page 97 of 408 Good morning, Harsh. Just wanted to check in to see how things were going. Thanks! Jeanne Schieffer Corporate Communications & Public Relations Manager Nebraska Public Power District 1414 15th Street Columbus, NE 68601 402.563.5990 – o 402.910.2313 – c jkschie@nppd.com This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any Page 98 of 408 attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to Page 99 of 408 another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 100 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.11878-000001 Owner: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Filename: DRAFT_Cooper_Economic_Impact_Report_rev4.pdf Last Modified: Mon Feb 05 12:53:38 CST 2018 Page 101 of 408 DRAFT_Cooper_Economic_Impact_Report_rev4.pdf for Printed Item: 1183 ( Attachment 1 of 1) ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE COOPER NUCLEAR STATION AN ANALYSIS BY THE NUCLE AR ENERGY INSTITUTE JANUARY 2018 Page 102 of 408 DRAFT_Cooper_Economic_Impact_Report_rev4.pdf for Printed Item: 1183 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 1 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute January 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary.................................................................................................... 2 Historical Background................................................................................................ 4 State and Regional Benefits.................................................................................... 5 Community Leadership and Environmental Protection................................... 7 Economic Impact Analysis Methodology.......................................................... 10 Conclusion.................................................................................................................... 11 © 2018 Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc., Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station all rights reserved. No part of this report may be reproduced, transmitted or modified without written permission of the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. Page 103 of 408 DRAFT_Cooper_Economic_Impact_Report_rev4.pdf for Printed Item: 1183 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 2 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute Cooper’s operations support more than January 2018 Cooper provides more than 1,000 Nebraska jobs, $112 million annually 680 jobs $66 million including more than in its 5 neighboring counties in state economic output, including in its 5 neighboring counties EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Cooper Nuclear Station (Cooper), located along the Missouri River in the southeast corner of Nebraska, has long been a vital part of the region’s energy portfolio, providing reliable electricity since it began operating in 1974. In addition to this reliable, carbonfree electricity, the plant supports hundreds of direct jobs. Employee involvement in their community also makes Cooper a significant social and economic contributor to Nebraska. Cooper is Nebraska’s largest single source of carbon-free electricity. To quantify the economic impacts of this facility in Nebraska, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) conducted an independent analysis. Based on data provided by Nebraska Public Power District (Cooper’s owner/ operator) on employment and operating expenditures, NEI conducted the analysis using the PI+ model provided by Regional Economic Models Inc. (REMI), a nationally recognized model. While there are certainly economic benefits to other states, particularly nearby Missouri and Iowa, this study focused only on the state of Nebraska. KEY FINDINGS Cooper’s operations provide: Employment benefits Cooper supports hundreds of jobs in the five counties surrounding the plant (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe and Richardson) and the rest of Nebraska through its operations. NEI estimates that the total number of jobs supported by Cooper annually is more than 1,000. That includes more than 680 jobs in the five counties surrounding the plant and 320 jobs in the rest of Nebraska. These employment numbers include direct and additional jobs created as a result of the expenditures from Cooper operations. more than $66 million for the five counties surrounding the plant and more than $46 million for the rest of Nebraska. While there are economic benefits to other states, particularly in nearby Missouri and Iowa, this study focused on the state of Nebraska. Economic stimulus Cooper produces significant economic benefits for Nebraska through its plant operations. NEI’s analysis finds that Cooper generates more than $112 million in annual economic output (value added), which includes 2018 total estimated economic benefits for the Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe and Richardson counties surrounding the Cooper Nuclear Station include: • $66 million in economic output from plant operations • $63 million increase in gross state product • $70 million in disposable personal income 2018 estimated economic benefits for the rest of Nebraska include: • $46 million in economic output from plant operations • $26 million increase in gross state product • $32 million in disposable personal income Page 104 of 408 DRAFT_Cooper_Economic_Impact_Report_rev4.pdf for Printed Item: 1183 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 3 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute Cooper prevents CO2 emissions of approximately 1.4 million cars each year Long-term economic stimulus This study finds that between 2018 and 2034 (60 year license expiration date), Cooper’s operations will generate more than $1.9 billion in economic output for Nebraska, including $1.2 billion to the five counties surrounding the plant and an additional $675 million in the rest of Nebraska. Clean electricity for Nebraska Cooper’s operations generate carbon-free clean electricity. Cooper prevents the release of more than 6.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually,1 the same amount released by approximately 1.4 million cars every year.2 For perspective, there are an estimated 733,000 passenger cars in Nebraska.3 January 2018 Cooper’s operation will result in more than $1.9 billion in economic benefits for Nebraska between 2018 and 2034 Reliability benefits As part of the Nebraska Public Power District's fleet of generating facilities, Cooper provides 820 MWs of reliable, carbon-free electricity. During the past five years, the station operated at more than 93 percent of capacity,4 on par with the industry average and significantly higher than other forms of electricity generation. This reliable production helps offset potential price volatility of other energy sources (e.g., natural gas) and the intermittency of renewable electricity sources. 1 Emissions prevented are calculated using the weighted average CO2 emissions rate (2,095 lbs/MWh) for the Midwest Reliability Organization region, provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Nebraska Public Power District reported electricity generation of 6.9 million MWh in 2017 from Cooper. 2 Calculated using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator. https://www.epa.gov/energy/ greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator . 3 Retrieved using January 2017 release of the highway statistics from the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. 4 Retrieved using ABB Velocity Suite, which sourced the data from U.S. Energy Information Administration. Page 105 of 408 DRAFT_Cooper_Economic_Impact_Report_rev4.pdf for Printed Item: 1183 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 4 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute January 2018 Cooper Nuclear Station • Type: Boiling water reactor • Commencement of commercial operation in 1974 • Located along the Missouri River in SE Nebraska • 60 year license expires in 2034 • Total gross electricity capacity: 820 MW HISTORICAL BACKGROUND Cooper Nuclear Station is located along the Missouri River in the southeast corner of Nebraska. It consists of one boiling water reactor that produces 820 megawatts (MW) of carbon-free baseload power. Cooper Nuclear Station is owned and operated by Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) and supplies the electric grid through the Southwest Power Pool, a regional transmission organization. Cooper is named after Humboldt, Nebraska, natives Guy Cooper Sr. and Guy Cooper Jr. in recognition of their contribution to public power in Nebraska. Cooper began commercial operation in 1974 under an initial 40-year license, which was renewed in 2010 for an additional 20 years. Its current license expiration is in 2034. RELIABLE ELECTRICITY GENERATION Cooper operated at a capacity factor of over 93 percent over the last five years.4 Capacity factor, a measure of electricity production efficiency, is the ratio of actual electricity generated to the maximum possible electric generation during the year. THOUSANDS OF LOCAL JOBS Cooper employs approximately 680 people, with more than 550 of them living in Nebraska.6 The annual payroll and benefits are more than $76 million for permanent employees and contractors, including over $60 million in the five counties surrounding the plant and more than $2.8 million in the rest of Nebraska. Most jobs at nuclear power plants require technical training and are typically among the highest-paying jobs in the area. Nationwide, nuclear energy jobs pay 36 percent more than average salaries in a plant’s local area.7 SAFE AND CLEAN FOR THE ENVIRONMENT Generating clean energy is an important step in reducing the effects of climate change and vital to protecting the environment for current and future generations. Nuclear energy facilities generate large amount of electricity without emitting greenhouse gases. State and federal policymakers recognize nuclear energy as an essential source of safe, reliable electricity that meets both environmental needs and demand for electricity. As the sole nuclear power plant in Nebraska, Cooper generated more than 6.9 million megawatt-hours in 2017,5 a new record for the plant. This results in Cooper providing power to over 450,000 Nebraskans during a nonrefueling outage year like 2017. Refueling outages occur every 24 months, with the next one scheduled for fall 2018. Cooper, like all nuclear power plants, produces baseload power that is carbon-free. Cooper avoids the emission of over 6.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually, the same amount released by approximately 1.4 million cars every year. For perspective, there are an estimated 733,000 passenger cars in Nebraska. Cooper also prevented the release of other air pollutants–over 7,900 short tons of sulfur dioxide8 and more than 5,590 short tons of nitrogen oxide9 —which are precursors to acid rain and urban smog. 5 Nebraska Public Power District reported the 2017 electricity 8 Emissions prevented are calculated using the weighted generation to via U.S. Energy Information Administration Form EIA-923. 6 Nebraska Public Power District provided 2016 actual employment numbers. 7 “Nuclear Energy’s Economic Benefits—Current and Future.” Nuclear Energy Institute, 2014. average sulfur dioxide emissions rate (2.2994 lbs/MWh) for the Midwest Reliability Organization region, provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 9 Emissions prevented are calculated using the weighted average nitrogen oxide emissions rate (1.6203 lbs/MWh) for the Midwest Reliability Organization region, provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Page 106 of 408 DRAFT_Cooper_Economic_Impact_Report_rev4.pdf for Printed Item: 1183 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 5 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute January 2018 STATE AND REGIONAL BENEFITS NEI used the REMI PI+ model (version 2.1.5) to analyze economic and expenditure data provided by NPPD to develop estimates of its economic benefits from Cooper Nuclear Station’s operations. More information on REMI can be found on page 10. The economic impacts of Cooper discussed in this section consist of the following variables that are used to analyze these impacts: Output Output, in this context, refers to the economic activity generated by Cooper Nuclear Station. The direct output is the economic activity produced by the facility. The secondary output is the value of the economic activity generated in other industries because of Cooper, as well as how people employed at the facility influence the demand for goods and services within the region. Employment The direct employment is the number of jobs at Cooper. Secondary employment is jobs in other industries as a result of Cooper’s operations. Gross state product Cooper contributes to Nebraska’s gross state product, which the REMI model calculates as value of goods and services produced by labor and property—minus intermediate goods. For a nuclear plant, electricity is the final good. The intermediate goods are the components purchased to make that electricity. Disposable personal income Cooper contributes a significant sum to Nebraska’s disposable personal income, which is one of the indicators used by economists to monitor the state of the economy. Disposable personal income identifies the available household money for spending and saving after accounting for the income taxes. Reliable power The reliable availability of Cooper’s power is critical to such things as national security and regional grid stability. Commercial businesses, industries, and manufacturing facilities which require power 24 hours a day, seven days a week also benefit from Cooper’s constant supply of electricity. STATE AND REGIONAL ECONOMIC EFFECTS The reliable availability of Cooper’s power is critical to national security and regional grid stability. Commercial businesses, industries and manufacturing facilities—which require power 24 hours a day, seven days a week­—also benefit from Cooper’s constant supply of electricity. Cooper’s total 2018 annual economic output impact on Nebraska is estimated to be over $112 million in direct and secondary impact, including over $66 million to the five counties surrounding the plant (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe and Richardson) and more than $46 million for the rest of Nebraska. Cooper contributes more than $89 million to Nebraska’s gross state product in 2018, including $63 million to the five counties and over $25 million to the rest of Nebraska. Cooper also contributes approximately $102 million to Nebraska’s disposable personal income in 2018, including $70 million to the five counties and $32 million to the rest of Nebraska. Table 1 summarizes the plant’s effects on the five counties and the rest of Nebraska’s economies, the gross state product and disposable personal income in 2018 from operations. Cooper’s operations have substantial economic impact on other industries. Cooper’s output also stimulates the state’s and region’s labor income and employment. The plant employs approximately 528 people in permanent and contracting jobs in the five counties and 23 people in the rest of Nebraska.10 These jobs stimulate over 450 additional jobs in the five counties and the rest of Nebraska. Table 2 details the quantity and types of jobs that Cooper supports. Plant workers are included in the table’s utility occupation category. LONG-TERM ECONOMIC BENEFITS This study finds that between 2018 and 2034 (the 60-year license expiration date), Cooper’s operations will generate over $1.9 billion in economic output to Nebraska, including $1.2 billion to the five counties surrounding the plant and an additional $675 million in the rest of the state. Page 107 of 408 DRAFT_Cooper_Economic_Impact_Report_rev4.pdf for Printed Item: 1183 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Table 1 COOPER’S ECONOMIC IMPACT (dollars in 2016 millions) Direct and Secondary Economic Output12 Description 2018 2018 to 2034 Output $66 $1,239 Gross State Product $63 Disposable Personal Income $70 (license expiration) Five counties surrounding the plant (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe and Richardson) Rest of Nebraska Output $215 Gross State Product $25 Disposable Personal Income $32 $675 Table 2 JOB IMPACTS FROM COOPER OPERATIONS Category 5 neighboring counties Rest of Nebraska Total Utilities14 528 23 551 Retail Trade 81 64 145 Other Services (except public administration) 19 35 54 Health Care, Social Assistance 16 57 73 Accommodation, Food Services 14 26 40 Finance, Insurance 9 16 25 Construction 6 10 16 Wholesale Trade 2 11 13 Professional, Scientific, Technical Services 1 19 20 Arts, Entertainment, Recreation 1 7 8 Manufacturing 1 6 7 Real Estate, Rental and Leasing 1 9 10 Transportation, Warehousing 1 6 7 Administrative, Waste Management Services 1 18 18 Other Industries 1 12 13 681 320 1,001 Total 10 NPPD provided the 2016 actual employment numbers. Cooper also hires approximately 130 people across Iowa, Missouri and elsewhere, however the numbers were not utilized for the purpose of this Nebraska-based study. 11 Direct output was calculated based on a four-year average between 2013 and 2016, in 2016 dollars. 12 Utilities sector includes direct employment at Cooper Nuclear Station in Nebraska and secondary employment from the rest of Nebraska to support the operations. Page 108 of 408 DRAFT_Cooper_Economic_Impact_Report_rev4.pdf for Printed Item: 1183 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 7 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute January 2018 COMMUNITY LEADERSHIP AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION In addition to the economic benefits Nebraska Public Power District contributes to the region in the form of jobs, income and economic output, NPPD and its employees play a major role in the health and welfare of the community. Cooper employees are involved in local community organizations, providing both voluntary and financial support. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Community leadership Cooper employees are active members of their communities. They serve on city councils, coach athletic teams, and own local businesses. Cooper staff are engaged in local philanthropic events and responding to local community needs during such events as storms and floods. Cooper employees also volunteer in community parades, local chamber of commerce chili cook-offs, holiday angel tree gift donations and school science fairs. School programs Cooper Nuclear Station is directly involved with the Energy Generation Operations Program at Southeast Community College (SECC) in Milford, Nebraska. The program began in 2008 as a way to train future operators and has emerged into a successful program that gives students hands-on operations training at the plant site. The students are prepared for employment at a nuclear power plant during the two-year program. NPPD continually provides opportunities to the students through tours, job shadowing experiences and recruitment upon graduation. NPPD’s energy education team and communication professionals bring presentations to schools and local civic groups to educate them about the benefits of nuclear power and Cooper’s support for the community. NPPD in 2017 set up its mobile science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) lab at Johnson High School for two weeks. Students and teachers took time to explore the lab, create, engineer, and experience job-related tasks to understand the importance and excitement of a career in the energy industry. The mobile STEM lab is complemented by online curriculum models, in-class presentations, robotic interactions with students and a statewide robotics program. At least 400 middle and high school students in five schools from around Cooper participated in one or more of Cooper’s energy education activities in 2017. Site tours NPPD encourages facility tours among its community. Cooper employees host the Nebraska LEAD Program, where members of the Nebraska Agriculture Leadership Council tour Cooper as part of the program’s educational site visits. Cooper has hosted representatives from Japan, as well as the USS Nebraska (SSBN-739), a nuclear-powered, Ohio-class submarine. Cooper conducts about 20 tours of the station every year, including tours for the Nebraska National Guard, local law enforcement, state dignitaries, international visitors, and local schools and colleges. Page 109 of 408 DRAFT_Cooper_Economic_Impact_Report_rev4.pdf for Printed Item: 1183 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 8 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute Plant Neighbor Survey A recent survey13 conducted for the Cooper Nuclear Station showed exceptional support from local residents, compared to the benchmarks from other nuclear power plants. The results are comparable to the same survey conducted in 2011. Ninety-two percent of Cooper’s neighbors have a favorable impression of the plant and its recent operations; 71 percent have a very favorable impression. In addition, 88 percent of Cooper’s neighbors favor nuclear energy. Respondents’ indicated their support for Cooper is based on perceptions of the plant’s safe operations and their favorable view of NPPD regarding economic impact, jobs, safety, community outreach and environmental protection. The survey also found: • 94 percent of respondents are confident in NPPD’s ability to operate a nuclear power plant safely. • 93 percent of Cooper’s neighbors believe nuclear energy will be important to meeting the nation’s electricity needs. • 93 percent said NPPD is doing a good job of protecting the environment. • 84 percent feel somewhat well informed about nuclear energy. • 72 percent believe people living near a nuclear plant are unlikely to be exposed to harmful levels of radiation. January 2018 ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP There have been no significant environmental impact recorded at Cooper Nuclear Station. NPPD's environmental stewardship is multifaceted, including such initiatives as developing wetlands and participating in pollinator programs in the area around Cooper. The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program at Cooper monitors radiation in ambient air, drinking water, river water, farm animal milk samples, soil, sediment, river fish and local vegetation. Samples are analyzed by independent vendor and the results are provided to the public and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The results have never exceeded regulatory limits. Fire Brigade and Emergency Medical Technicians Cooper employs nearly 100 individuals who serve as members of the on-site fire brigade or who are certified as emergency medical technicians (EMTs). Additionally, all Cooper employees are trained to perform first responder duties in the event of an emergency. NPPD’s Hazardous Material Emergency Response Plan also identifies specifically trained individuals and teams to respond to particular events (such as spills, fires or medical emergencies), if required. This dedication to safety expands beyond Cooper. Members of its fire brigade also support their local fire departments, and Cooper’s EMTs serve on area response crews. They also participate in and lead training courses for area fire departments and rescue squads. 13 The survey was conducted by Bisconti Research Inc. and Quest Global Research in the fall of 2017. Approximately 250 people living within 10 miles of Cooper Nuclear Station were surveyed. The purpose of the survey was to measure the opinions of local residents about the plant as a neighbor, employer and economic engine. Page 110 of 408 DRAFT_Cooper_Economic_Impact_Report_rev4.pdf for Printed Item: 1183 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 9 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute Emergency Preparedness Plan NPPD’s Cooper operations always prioritize safety. NPPD partners with the states of Nebraska and Missouri to ensure the public safety is always top of mind. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission carefully regulates and tests the validity of Cooper’s emergency preparedness plan, designed to protect public health and safety in the unlikely event of an incident. High training standards and well-qualified staff demonstrate NPPD’s commitment to ensure that the physical environment is safe for all residents. Members of Cooper's emergency response organization are annually tested and qualified to perform their roles. Cooper tests its emergency response plan multiple times throughout the year. Exercises and drills are conducted both on-site and in partnership with the Nebraska Emergency Management Agency and the State of Missouri Emergency Management Agency, as well as county, state and local law enforcement, and regulatory entities such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Cooper provides both emergency information and an in-home radio alert system to residents living within a 10-mile radius of the plant. NPPD's call center also is part of Cooper's emergency response organization and will answer calls 24x7. As a statewide utility, NPPD uses Cooper’s emergency response plan as a reference for similar crisis preparations, including its cyber security response plan, emergency restoration exercises, and its participation in the national Grid Ex exercise. January 2018 Personnel qualifications Cooper’s Fitness for Duty Program ensures employees are qualified to access the site. Employees are hired after a stringent background check and drug screening. NPPD conducts random daily drug tests to measure and monitor employee performance. Cooper is home to the Cooper Nuclear Station Learning Center which provides comprehensive training for employees on a variety of industry and operational programs. A specially-designed simulator of the power plant’s control room assists in training NPPD personnel to operate the plant in both normal and emergency conditions. Every Cooper reactor operator must undergo extensive training to earn an operator license from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and ongoing training is required to maintain a reactor operators' license. Industry Performance and Regulatory Standing Cooper Nuclear Station is a member of the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) and benefits from the organization’s evaluation and benchmarking processes. The mission of INPO is to “promote the highest level of safety and reliability—to promote excellence—in the performance of commercial nuclear power plants. Cooper continues to perform in the highest category of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Reactor Oversight Process Action Matrix. Page 111 of 408 DRAFT_Cooper_Economic_Impact_Report_rev4.pdf for Printed Item: 1183 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 10 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute January 2018 ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY This analysis uses the REMI PI+ version 2.1.5 model to estimate the economic and fiscal impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station. REGIONAL ECONOMIC MODELS INC. 1. Input/output tabulation (IO)—IO models, sometimes called “social accounting matrices” (SAM), quantify the interrelation of industries and households in a computational sense. It models the flow of goods between firms in supply chains, wages paid to households, and final consumption by households, governments and the international market. These channels create the “multiplier” effect of $1 going further. The REMI model has two main purposes: forecasting and analysis of alternatives. All models have a “baseline” forecast of the future of a regional economy at the county level. Using “policy variables,” in REMI terminology, provides scenarios based on different situations. The ability to model policy variables makes it a powerful tool for conveying the economic “story” behind policy. The model translates various considerations into understandable concepts like gross domestic product and jobs. 2. Computable general equilibrium (CGE)—CGE modeling adds market concepts to the IO structure. This includes how IO structures evolve over time and how they respond to alternative policies. CGE incorporates concepts on markets for labor, housing, consumer goods, imports and the importance of competitiveness to fostering economic growth over time. Changing one of these will influence the others—for instance, a new knife factory would improve the labor market by increasing migration into the area, driving housing and rent prices higher, and inducing the market to create a new subdivision to return to “market clearing” conditions. Regional Economic Models Inc. (REMI), headquartered in Amherst, Massachusetts, is a modeling firm specializing in services related to economic impacts and policy analysis. It provides software, support services, and issue-based expertise and consulting in almost every state, the District of Columbia, and other countries in North America, Europe, Latin America, the Middle East and Asia. REMI relies on data from public sources, including the Bureau of Economic Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Energy Information Administration and the Census Bureau. Forecasts for future macroeconomic conditions in REMI come from a combination of resources, which serve as the main framework for the software model needed to perform simulations. POLICY INSIGHT PLUS REMI’s Policy Insight Plus (PI+) is a computerized, multiregional, dynamic model of the states or other subnational units of the United States economy. PI+ relies on four quantitative methodologies to guide its approach to economic modeling: 3. Econometrics—REMI uses statistical parameters and historical data to populate the numbers inside the IO and CGE portions. The estimation of the different parameters, elasticity terms and figures gives the strength of various responses. It also gives the “time-lags” from the beginning of a policy to the point where markets have had a chance to clear. 4. New economic geography—Economic geography provides REMI a sense of economies of scale and agglomeration. It quantifies the strength of clusters in an area and their influence on productivity in that sector. The concentrated labor in an area is specialized to serve companies, thus, their longterm productivity grows more quickly than that of smaller regions with no proclivity in that sector. Page 112 of 408 DRAFT_Cooper_Economic_Impact_Report_rev4.pdf for Printed Item: 1183 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 11 Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute January 2018 CONCLUSION ECONOMIC AND EMPLOYMENT IMPACTS NEI’s analysis finds that Cooper generates more than $112 million in annual economic output in Nebraska through its continued operations. This includes over $66 million for the five counties surrounding the station (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe and Richardson) and more than $46 million for the rest of Nebraska. NEI’s analysis also finds that Cooper supports more than 1,000 jobs annually, which includes 680 jobs in the five counties and more than 320 jobs in the rest of Nebraska from continued operations. FURTHER BENEFITS OF COOPER The station’s economic benefits—through wages and purchases of supplies and services—are considerable. In addition, plant employees further stimulate the local economy by purchasing goods and services from businesses around the area, supporting many small businesses in Nebraska. The facility generated 6.9 million megawatt-hours of carbon-free electricity in 2017, enough to serve the yearly needs for hundreds of thousands of homes and address climate change. Cooper Nuclear Station is an important contributor to NPPD's generation portfolio, serving the energy needs of Nebraskans with carbon-free and reliable electricity. Page 113 of 408 DRAFT_Cooper_Economic_Impact_Report_rev4.pdf for Printed Item: 1183 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute January 2018 1201 F Street, NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 nei.org Page 114 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5740 From: Pope, Patrick L. To: Bender, Traci L. ; Curry, Kendall B. ; Dent Jr., John A. ; Dostal, Alan L. ; Kent, Thomas J. ; McClure, John C. ; Saltzgaber, Conrad L. ; Schieffer, Jeanne K. ; Kimball, David S. Cc: Bcc: Subject: FW: Update Regarding Membership Issues Date: Sat Feb 03 2018 19:06:23 CST Attachments: image001.jpg image002.jpg Good grief. :-( Pat (402) 469-4436 – cell Safety & Security – See something? SAY something! From: KORSNICK, Maria [mailto:mgk@nei.org] Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2018 3:14 PM Cc: GRP. ELT Subject: Update Regarding Membership Issues **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ To: NEI Board of Directors NEI Advisory Committee Members Page 115 of 408 NEI Member Company Chief Executive Officers In early January, NEI Board of Directors Chair Don Brandt informed you that NEI was notified that two nuclear companies would not renew their membership in NEI for 2018. Despite good faith efforts by NEI management in close consultation with the Executive Committee, NEI’s outreach to these entities to resolve differences regarding continued access to certain NEI membership benefits have not been fruitful. Rather, NextEra yesterday filed a lawsuit alleging various claims including breach of the Personnel Access Data System (PADS) Agreement. The lawsuit also includes a number of inflammatory statements. NEI vehemently denies all of the allegations in NextEra’s lawsuit and will vigorously defend our position in court. Contrary to what NextEra has stated in its pleadings, the agreement governing PADS expressly provides that participation in PADS is limited to NEI members. Thus, when NextEra voluntarily chose to discontinue its NEI membership, it was no longer entitled to continue participating in PADS, which is a member benefit. NEI nevertheless offered NextEra the opportunity to temporarily reinstate its membership in an effort to allow it and NEI more time to discuss—and possibly resolve—the concerns that caused NextEra to leave the organization. As a practical matter, if agreement was not reached, the proposed reinstatement period also would have allowed NextEra time to develop its own access systems and procedures. To call NEI’s approach retaliatory, or even suggest the notion of extortion, is both counterfactual and offensive to the good faith effort the offer represents. NEI’s good faith outreach was intended to open a dialogue that would advance the industry’s interest in remaining unified, or as unified as possible, on regulatory and other policy positions. Unfortunately, rather than even opening a dialogue, NextEra immediately followed its rejection of NEI’s offer with a baseless lawsuit. Despite being irrelevant to its legal claims, NextEra’s complaint also raises objection to NEI’s support of the DOE’s efforts to preserve the existing nuclear fleet. In fact, NEI’s rigorous Policy Process gathers input from NEI’s advisory committees before establishing policy positions, most of which are advocated only after approval by members of the Executive Committee. Although NextEra may not have agreed with NEI’s advocacy, our work was guided by our member companies. NEI remains committed to achieving our foundational mission: to preserve, sustain, innovate and grow the nuclear energy industry. I believe all of NEI’s actions should be and are consistent with that purpose. NEI also remains committed to ensuring all decisions and actions taken maintain a safe, effective and well-operated nuclear energy fleet. NEI’s commitment to each of those core principles will always be absolute and without compromise. We appreciate your continued support. Page 116 of 408 Maria MARIA KORSNICK President and Chief Executive Officer 1201 F Street NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 P: 202.739.8187 M: 410.456.0756 E: mgk@nei.org nei.org This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 117 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5740-000001 Owner: Pope, Patrick L. Filename: image001.jpg Last Modified: Sat Feb 03 19:06:23 CST 2018 Page 118 of 408 image001.jpg for Printe em: 1185 lnt1) of2) Document ID: 0.7.395.5740-000002 Owner: Pope, Patrick L. Filename: image002.jpg Last Modified: Sat Feb 03 19:06:23 CST 2018 Page 120 of 408 image002.jpg for Printe em: 11851 1N lnt20f2) Document ID: 0.7.395.5571 From: KORSNICK, Maria To: Cc: GRP. ELT Bcc: Subject: Update Regarding Membership Issues Date: Sat Feb 03 2018 15:14:05 CST Attachments: image001.jpg **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ To: NEI Board of Directors NEI Advisory Committee Members NEI Member Company Chief Executive Officers In early January, NEI Board of Directors Chair Don Brandt informed you that NEI was notified that two nuclear companies would not renew their membership in NEI for 2018. Despite good faith efforts by NEI management in close consultation with the Executive Committee, NEI’s outreach to these entities to resolve differences regarding continued access to certain NEI membership benefits have not been fruitful. Rather, NextEra yesterday filed a lawsuit alleging various claims including breach of the Personnel Access Data System (PADS) Agreement. The lawsuit also includes a number of inflammatory statements. NEI vehemently denies all of the allegations in NextEra’s lawsuit and will vigorously defend our position in court. Contrary to what NextEra has stated in its pleadings, the agreement governing PADS expressly provides that participation in PADS is limited to NEI members. Thus, when NextEra voluntarily chose to discontinue its NEI membership, it was no longer entitled to continue participating in PADS, which is a member benefit. NEI nevertheless offered NextEra the opportunity to temporarily reinstate its membership in an effort to allow it and NEI more time to discuss—and possibly resolve—the concerns that caused NextEra to leave the organization. As a practical matter, if agreement was not reached, the proposed reinstatement period also would have allowed NextEra time to develop its own access systems and procedures. To call NEI’s approach retaliatory, or even suggest the notion of extortion, is both counterfactual and offensive to the good faith effort the offer represents. NEI’s good faith outreach was intended to open a dialogue that would advance the industry’s interest in remaining unified, or as unified as possible, on regulatory and other policy positions. Unfortunately, Page 122 of 408 rather than even opening a dialogue, NextEra immediately followed its rejection of NEI’s offer with a baseless lawsuit. Despite being irrelevant to its legal claims, NextEra’s complaint also raises objection to NEI’s support of the DOE’s efforts to preserve the existing nuclear fleet. In fact, NEI’s rigorous Policy Process gathers input from NEI’s advisory committees before establishing policy positions, most of which are advocated only after approval by members of the Executive Committee. Although NextEra may not have agreed with NEI’s advocacy, our work was guided by our member companies. NEI remains committed to achieving our foundational mission: to preserve, sustain, innovate and grow the nuclear energy industry. I believe all of NEI’s actions should be and are consistent with that purpose. NEI also remains committed to ensuring all decisions and actions taken maintain a safe, effective and well-operated nuclear energy fleet. NEI’s commitment to each of those core principles will always be absolute and without compromise. We appreciate your continued support. Maria MARIA KORSNICK President and Chief Executive Officer 1201 F Street NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 P: 202.739.8187 M: 410.456.0756 E: mgk@nei.org nei.org This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Page 123 of 408 Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 124 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5571-000001 Owner: KORSNICK, Maria Filename: image001.jpg Last Modified: Sat Feb 03 15:14:05 CST 2018 Page 125 of 408 image001.jpg for Printe em: 1188 lnt1) of1) Document ID: 0.7.395.11765 From: Nuclear Energy Assembly 2018 To: McClure, John C. Cc: Bcc: Subject: Registration for the Nuclear Energy Assembly Is Open! Date: Fri Feb 02 2018 11:06:36 CST Attachments: **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Plan to meet your nuclear network in Atlanta. NUCLEAR ENERGY ASSEMBLY & EXPO May 21-23 Atlanta Marriott Marquis Registration is open for the top industry leadership conference in 2018. Let's join together to "Power the Extraordinary." REGISTER NOW _____ Program Jamie Williams jsw@nei.org Logistics/Sponsors Arika Johnson amj@nei.org Registrar Denise Bell dxb@nei.org Page 127 of 408 Exhibits Ken Morton kwm@nei.org Nuclear Energy Institute · 1201 F Street N.W. Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20004 · 202.739.8000 www.nei.org Unsubscribe from these messages. Page 128 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5708 From: Nuclear Energy Overview To: Kent, Thomas J. Cc: Bcc: Subject: Nuclear Energy Overview - Feb. 1, 2018 Date: Fri Feb 02 2018 07:10:54 CST Attachments: **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Nuclear Energy Overview February 1, 2018 This week's top story — FP&L Files for Second License Renewal for Turkey Point Florida Power & Light Co. has filed an application for a second license renewal of its Turkey Point 3 and 4 reactors with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission — the first such application in U.S. nuclear plant operating history. A second license extension would allow the reactors to operate until 2052 and 2053, and save FPL customers "billions of dollars by avoiding the need for other more expensive power generation," FP&L said. The submitted application is the result of long-term research and coordination between NEI, the Electric Power Research Institute's Long-Term Operations Program, the U.S. Department of Energy's Light Water Reactor Sustainability Program and the NRC, NEI Senior Project Manager of Life Extension and New Technology Jerud Hanson said. Other Stories this week — · NRC Introduces Clearer Fee Invoices for Fiscal 2018 · Report Urges Long-Term Power Agreements for SMRs at Federal Sites You can view Overview by clicking here. _____ Nuclear Energy Overview's daily news service provides the latest information on industry topics, legislation and more. For news as it happens, bookmark the NEO page and check frequently for new content. Or click for a roll-up of this week's stories in PDF format. Nuclear Energy Institute _____ Your questions, comments, suggestions or any additions to the mailing list are welcome. We can be reached at overview@nei.org. We look forward to hearing from you. Page 129 of 408 For more information, visit www.nei.org. Unsubscribe from these messages. twitter facebook You Tube RSS Flickr Blogger This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Page 130 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5382 From: Pope, Patrick L. To: Kimball, David S. Cc: Bcc: Subject: RE: SRAB Date: Thu Feb 01 2018 16:43:31 CST Attachments: We’ll discuss when I’m at the plant on Tuesday. Thanks! Pat (402) 469-4436 – cell Safety & Security – See something? SAY something! From: Kimball, David S. Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2018 2:12 PM To: Pope, Patrick L. Subject: FW: SRAB FYI – just showing you an example of where Entergy not joining NEI is confusing to our staff and can hurt us in the long run. Outage inprocessing is where this would really hurt. Not being a part of nantel/training records shared database, will hurt us all. I also have multiple examples since the announcement where DNP bulletins cannot be answered as we had intended because Entergy was doing part of the work. Dave Kimball From: Madron, Derrick E. Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2018 2:07 PM Page 131 of 408 To: Kimball, David S. Cc: Schwarting, Jeff L. Subject: RE: SRAB James Wiggins is currently badged at Pilgrim and Tim Mitchell was last badged at Pilgrim on 2/21/17. Here is the thing now though, with the strong potential that Entergy will no longer be a member utility within NEI come Monday morning, badging them quickly may not be an option. We are discussing that and hope to get the process ironed out going forward. We will keep you informed. Thanks! Derrick From: Kimball, David S. Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2018 2:01 PM To: Madron, Derrick E. Subject: FW: SRAB Derrick, I think both of these guys are badged at other facilities. Tim may not have been since leaving Entergy however. Dave Kimball From: Kingery, Haley J. Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2018 1:58 PM To: Kimball, David S. Subject: SRAB Dave, The new members are uploaded into NFLOW and I have sent their information to Derrick Madron to start the PHQ paperwork for badging them. Haley Kingery Page 132 of 408 Cooper Nuclear Station Executive Administrative Assistant 402-825-5442 hjkinge@nppd.com Page 133 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5539 From: tealey@entergy.com on behalf of Bakken III, Christopher To: Bakken III, Christopher ; Costanzo, Christopher Robert ; Jacobs,, Donna -Entergy ; Elnitsky, John ; Ventosa,, John A. Entergy ; Jury, Keith ; Coyle,, Larry- Entergy ; Limpias,, Oscar- Entergy ; Vitale,, Anthony J. Entergy ; Sullivan,, Brian -Entergy ; Heckenberger,, Jeff- Entergy ; Cook,, Kimberly S -Entergy ; Martin, Leo Anthony ; Nichols, Steven E ; James,, William -Entergy ; Larson, Eric A ; Dinelli, John ; Maguire,, WilliamEntergy ; Arnone,, Charles F -Entergy ; Dent Jr, John ; Anderson, Richard L ; Dent Jr., John A. ; PROCTOR, BRUCE N ; Moody, Carol HR-Nuclear ; Laplante, Jonathan ; Sullivan, Joseph ; Halter, Mandy ; Buman, Daniel E. ; Dia, Khalil M. Cc: Bcc: Subject: NEI Discussion - 6:00 PM CT / 7:00 PM ET Date: Thu Feb 01 2018 10:09:52 CST Attachments: StartTime: Thu Feb 01 18:00:00 Central Standard Time 2018 EndTime: Thu Feb 01 19:00:00 Central Standard Time 2018 Location: Dial In: Internal - 8-576-7721 / External - 504-576-7721,,,3045# Recurring: No ShowReminder: No Accepted: Yes AcceptedTime: Thu Feb 01 10:26:00 Central Standard Time 2018 **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. ________________________________ Page 134 of 408 Page 135 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.11525 From: Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman To: McClure, John C. Cc: Bcc: Subject: 9th Annual Pillsbury / NEI Seminar: Hot-Button Issues in International Nuclear Trade Date: Wed Jan 31 2018 15:09:24 CST Attachments: **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Having trouble reading this email? View it in your browser 9th ANNUAL Pillsbury / NEI Seminar Hot-Button Issues in International Nuclear Trade You are invited to the 9TH Annual Pillsbury and Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Seminar as we discuss hot-button issues in nuclear trade and export controls. Page 136 of 408 Topics Include: *Dialogue with Top Administration Officials: U.S. International Nuclear Trade Policy *Approvals for International Nuclear Cooperation: Challenges and Successes *Part 810 Compliance, Enforcement and Best Practices *Exports of Software and Codes: Key Issues *Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act (FIRRMA): Issues for the Nuclear Industry REGISTER Wednesday, February 28, 2018 8:00am - 7:30pm ET Continental breakfast and lunch will be provided. Cocktail Reception at 5:30pm. Pillsbury's Office in Washington, DC 1200 Seventeenth Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 Page 137 of 408 pillsburylaw.com © 2018 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP. All rights reserved. Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, +1.888.387.5714 1200 Seventeenth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20036, USA manage your email preferences unsubscribe Page 138 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.11489 From: McClure, John C. To: Pope, Patrick L. Cc: Bcc: Subject: NEI Date: Tue Jan 30 2018 15:29:47 CST Attachments: Pat Entergy’s departure from NEI creates an interesting issue. It is my understanding the CNO’s comprise one of the key strategy committees at NEI. I do not know if John Dent has been active in the committee, but if he is he will clearly need to take his direction from NPPD and not be sharing NEI discussions with Entergy once they are no longer a member. This is a unique situation which we need to properly manage. John Page 139 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5514 From: PITESA, Bill To: PITESA, Bill ; Dent Jr., John A. ; Lee, Barbara J. Cc: Bcc: Subject: Bill Pitesa & John Dent conversation Date: Tue Jan 30 2018 15:06:38 CST Attachments: StartTime: Wed Feb 07 10:30:00 Central Standard Time 2018 EndTime: Wed Feb 07 11:00:00 Central Standard Time 2018 Location: Bill to call 402-825-5148 Recurring: No ShowReminder: No Accepted: Yes AcceptedTime: Tue Jan 30 15:06:00 Central Standard Time 2018 **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. ________________________________ This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. ________________________________ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 140 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5351 From: Pope, Patrick L. To: Kimball, David S. ; Dostal, Alan L. Cc: Dent Jr., John A. Bcc: Subject: RE: Subsequent/Second License Renewal Date: Tue Jan 30 2018 12:12:01 CST Attachments: Thanks Dave. On a related note, I asked one of my fellow TEA CEOs who is from Ohio what he thought First Energy’s chances of getting nuclear subsidies from the Ohio Legislature was. His answer – zero. Time will tell. Pat (402) 469-4436 – cell Safety & Security – See something? SAY something! From: Kimball, David S. Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 11:09 AM To: Pope, Patrick L.; Dostal, Alan L. Cc: Dent Jr., John A. Subject: Subsequent/Second License Renewal Good Morning Guys, I am in San Diego at EPRI Nuclear Power Council. Yesterday, my agenda included the Long Term Operations Integration Committee/NEI joint meeting. Long story short, there are four units in the queue for submittal of a second license renewal (80 years). It appears the energy industry is putting Nuclear’s future in this basket. Schedule: Page 141 of 408 Turkey Point Units 3&4 (FP&L) (Submittal is today 1/30/18 for both units) The Miami-Dade county Mayor is announcing it this morning. Peach Bottom – (Exelon) Submittal Scheduled July 10th 2018 Surry (PWR) (Dominion) – Submittal 2019 North Anna (Lagging Surry by choice because they are using the same technical resources) Submittal scheduled for late 2019/2020 The Long term Operations Technical Advisory Committee is just starting, so I will keep you informed of industry information after this meeting as well. Dave Kimball Page 142 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5471 From: PITESA, Bill To: PITESA, Bill ; Adam Heflin ; Bob Bement ; Brad Sawatzke (bjsawatzke@energy-northwest.com) ; Bryan Hanson ; Dan Stoddard ; Danny Bost ; Fadi Diya ; Jeff Archie ; jmw1@pge.com ; Joel Gebbie (jpgebbie@aep.com) ; Dent Jr., John A. ; Keith J Polston (keith.polson@dteenergy.com) ; Ken Peters (ken.peters@luminant.com) ; Michael Balduzzi ; Pete Sena (Peter.SenaIII@pseg.com) ; Preston Gillespie (preston.gillespie@duke-energy.com) ; Sam Belcher ; Timothy O'Connor ; POWELL, Tim ; Timothy Rausch ; Dent Jr, John (jdent@entergy.com) Cc: Bcc: Subject: NEI Call: Confidential Date: Mon Jan 29 2018 15:27:36 CST Attachments: StartTime: Tue Jan 30 16:00:00 Central Standard Time 2018 EndTime: Tue Jan 30 17:00:00 Central Standard Time 2018 Location: 1-877-647-3411, Passcode: 659340 Recurring: No ShowReminder: No Accepted: Yes AcceptedTime: Mon Jan 29 15:35:00 Central Standard Time 2018 **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. ________________________________ NSIAC, I plan to hold a call tomorrow (Jan 30) at 5pm EST to briefly update you on our approach to addressing changes in NEI’s membership. (A meeting notice will follow this email and if you are unable to attend, I’ ll follow up with a note to you on Wednesday.) Also, we will be conducting a webinar with your Access personnel, scheduled for Thursday Feb 1, to explain the new logistics related to PADS usage. Page 143 of 408 I recognize this is short notice but ask that you accommodate the call if possible. Thanks, Bill This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. ________________________________ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 144 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.10849 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. To: McClure, John C. Cc: Bcc: Subject: RE: NEI Impact Study Date: Fri Jan 26 2018 07:14:22 CST Attachments: Ok. Thx. Sent with BlackBerry Work (www.blackberry.com) From: McClure, John C. Date: Friday, Jan 26, 2018, 7:11 AM To: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Subject: NEI Impact Study I have read and have several comments and questions. I will stop by first thing this morning. Page 145 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.10847 From: McClure, John C. To: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Cc: Bcc: Subject: NEI Impact Study Date: Fri Jan 26 2018 07:11:53 CST Attachments: I have read and have several comments and questions. I will stop by first thing this morning. Page 146 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5480 From: Nuclear Energy Overview To: Kent, Thomas J. Cc: Bcc: Subject: Nuclear Energy Overview - Jan. 25, 2018 Date: Fri Jan 26 2018 07:06:23 CST Attachments: **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Nuclear Energy Overview January 25, 2018 This week's top story — Streamlining New Plant Licensing Critical to US Nuclear Leadership The U.S. nuclear industry this week provided the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission a set of recommendations on how the agency can streamline licensing of advanced reactors to ensure American leadership in nuclear energy. Developed by NEI in coordination with the Nuclear Innovation Alliance (NIA) and the U.S. Nuclear Infrastructure Council (USNIC), the white paper, "Ensuring the Future of U.S. Nuclear Energy: Creating a Streamlined and Predictable Licensing Pathway to Deployment," outlines the necessary steps to support innovation, commercialization and deployment of new nuclear technology. Other Stories this week — · Senate Hears Need for Electricity Markets to Value Resiliency · NEI Initiative, NRC Inspections Will Resolve 'Open Phase' Issue · Ohio Millennials: We Need Advanced Reactors You can view Overview by clicking here. _____ Nuclear Energy Overview's daily news service provides the latest information on industry topics, legislation and more. For news as it happens, bookmark the NEO page and check frequently for new content. Or click for a roll-up of this week's stories in PDF format. Nuclear Energy Institute _____ Your questions, comments, suggestions or any additions to the mailing list are welcome. We can be reached at overview@nei.org. We look forward to hearing from you. For more information, visit www.nei.org. Page 147 of 408 Unsubscribe from these messages. twitter facebook You Tube RSS Flickr Blogger This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Page 148 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.10318 From: Nuclear R&D Summit 2018 To: McClure, John C. Cc: Bcc: Subject: INNOVATE: Register Now for Nuclear R&D Summit Date: Mon Jan 22 2018 11:18:20 CST Attachments: **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Leaders speak on future of nuclear R&D Attend the Nuclear R&D Summit and learn about the future of nuclear research and development. NUCLEAR R&D SUMMIT Part of Nuclear Innovation Week March 6-7 Long View Gallery Washington, D.C. REGISTER SUMMIT TOPICS *Innovation and R&D *Light water reactors *New reactor support *Crosscutting initiatives *Nuclear infrastructure *Stable workforce CAN'T MISS EVENTS *Advocate on Capitol Hill *Millennial Nuclear Caucus event *Reception with award presentation WHO SHOULD ATTEND *Innovators *National lab employees Page 149 of 408 *Academia *New reactor developers *Policymakers *Influencers *Regulators REGISTER CONTACTS Program/Sponsors Harsh S. Desai Manager, Policy Development hsd@nei.org Logistics Arika Johnson Senior Manager, Conferences amj@nei.org Registrar Denise Bell Registrar registrar@nei.org Nuclear Energy Institute · 1201 F Street N.W. Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20004 · 202.739.8000 www.nei.org Unsubscribe from these messages. Page 150 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5420 From: PITESA, Bill To: Timothy Rausch Cc: Adam Heflin ; Bob Bement ; Brad Sawatzke (bjsawatzke@energy-northwest.com) ; Bryan Hanson ; Dan Stoddard ; Danny Bost ; Fadi Diya ; Jeff Archie ; jmw1@pge.com ; Joel Gebbie (jpgebbie@aep.com) ; Dent Jr., John A. ; Keith J Polston (keith.polson@dteenergy.com) ; Ken Peters (ken.peters@luminant.com) ; Michael Balduzzi ; Pete Sena (Peter.SenaIII@pseg.com) ; Preston Gillespie (preston.gillespie@duke-energy.com) ; Sam Belcher ; Timothy O'Connor ; POWELL, Tim ; BUTLER, John ; POLLOCK, Joseph Bcc: Subject: NSIAC Request for NEI Value Date: Fri Jan 19 2018 12:32:18 CST Attachments: NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Tim, From your request of the NEI value proposition, I wanted to provide a 2017 report that discusses some of the NEI results from last year (pg 3-4 provide some tangible data). Give me a little time to work on your request for an ROI view. Bill This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any Page 151 of 408 attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 152 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5420-000001 Owner: PITESA, Bill Filename: NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf Last Modified: Fri Jan 19 12:32:18 CST 2018 Page 153 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 2017 ANNUAL BUSINESS PLAN END-OF-YEAR REPORT Page 154 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) REPORT METHODOLOGY NEI has established a long-term vision as the organizing principle for its planning process: America’s nuclear power plants are operating at world-class levels of safety and reliability, governed by an efficient, well-managed, safety-focused regulatory process. The attributes of America’s nuclear power plants are fully valued in U.S. markets. Supported by political and public acceptance of nuclear power, policies are in place to ensure nuclear energy expands as the leading provider of carbon-free energy into the 2030s. A consolidated storage facility for used fuel is built and operating by 2025 and serving as the front-end for a permanent repository, which is being developed. U.S. reactor designs are recognized as the most innovative available, and U.S. companies are positioned to compete effectively in the international market. American industry maintains a leadership role in the development, demonstration and operation of nuclear technologies for electricity production. In order to make this vision a reality, NEI established for 2017 five major industry imperatives or goals. These goals are areas that pose significant risk or benefits to the industry. The five goals are: 1. Achieve a demonstrably improved regulatory environment for domestic nuclear facilities that comports with the NRC’s Principles of Good Regulation (i.e., independent, open, efficient, clear and reliable) and avoids undue burden from existing, new or revised regulations. 2. Durable, bipartisan political support for nuclear energy exists at the federal and state levels, reflecting strengthened public and policymaker confidence in nuclear energy. 3. Policies are in place to ensure that nuclear provides a growing portion of U.S. electricity supply. 4. Delivering the Nuclear Promise: Safety, Reliability and Economic Performance: Transform the nuclear industry and ensure its future viability and profitability by making efficiency improvements, monetizing the value of the plants to the grid and strengthening the industry’s commitment to excellence in safety and reliability. 5. NEI is best-in-class among industry associations for value to its members, integrity, well-managed operations and sustainable leadership. NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report Each goal had annual deliverables, which represent the projects and initiatives tracked by NEI management. There were 33 deliverables in NEI’s 2017 business plan. Although these deliverables are the basis on which NEI performance is judged, they do not comprise all of NEI’s work. There are a large number of ongoing activities that do not surface as deliverables. NEI calls these “mission-critical activities.” These missioncritical activities are the connective tissue in the NEI annual business plan. They include creating written content to educate the media and policymakers or to ensure broad industry awareness of major issues and events, holding conferences and workshops that allow the industry to focus its resources on critical issues, building relationships that provide NEI access to policymakers and allow NEI to influence policy, and many other similar activities. RESULTS FOR 2017 This report includes a summary status report on each of the deliverables. 2018 ANNUAL PLAN PREVIEW Beginning in 2018, NEI is adopting the national nuclear energy strategy (NNES) as the foundation for its annual business planning process. 1 Page 155 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) TABLE OF CONTENTS REPORT HIGHLIGHTS............................................................................................3-4 GOAL 1.0.........................................................................................................................5 GOAL 2.0..................................................................................................................... 13 GOAL 3.0..................................................................................................................... 19 GOAL 4.0.................................................................................................................... 24 GOAL 5.0.................................................................................................................... 29 © 2017 Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc., NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End of Year Report, all rights reserved. No part of this report may be reproduced, transmitted or modified without written permission of the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 2 Page 156 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) REPORT HIGHLIGHTS Promoting Regulatory Efficiency through a Culture Change at NRC $139 Committee to Review Generic 12 NRC Requirements recommendations illion m reduction to NRC EDO to improve backfitting process in NRC budget since FY2014 4 $600,000 per site anticipated reduction onth m reduction (from 22 to 18) in second license renewal application process timeline 100% of NRC staff receiving updated backfitting training by January 2018 in NRC review fees from PRA peer review finding closures Spent Fuel Storage 24 Independent Installation licenses renewed based on NEI guidance on operations-based aging management Creating Support for Nuclear Energy and Strengthening NEI Influence Over 5,000 messages sent Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Over Prevented reimplementation to lawmakers through Nuclear Matters 4,000 media hits (including Forbes, The Wall Street Journal, USA Today, The Washington Post) Act passed by bipartisan vote of House Energy & Commerce Committee of $200 million uranium decontamination and decommissioning tax Market reform bill passed in Connecticut NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report illion $2 mraised by NEI PAC for pronuclear elected officials Federal action to value nuclear now an administration priority with FERC rulemaking to recognize the role of resilient generators +9% net approval for nuclear for 35-49 group from ad campaign 3 Page 157 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) REPORT HIGHLIGHTS Broadening Opportunities for Nuclear Energy Facilitated participation in $4.2 million vouchers issued Trade mission in $95 million Congressional appropriations in Saudi Arabia RFI to support advanced reactor developments to promote access to Mexican market for SMR Licensing Technical Support program Trade mission to quadrennial IAEA Ministerial: Engagement with Canada, Indonesia, Japan, Jordan, Mexico, the Philippines, Saudi Arabia and Ukraine Ensuring Future Viability through Delivering the Nuclear Promise $820 million in new cost savings enabled 15.7% reduction 22 in the cost of generation from 2012 to 2016 new efficiency bulletins issued Making NEI More Efficient $6 million in member savings from Nuclear Matters integration 13% reduction in personnel from reorganization 17 new members recruited 5% reduction in overall expenses ($2.5 million) from reorganization and cost efficiencies resulting in $600,000 increase in dues revenues NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 4 Page 158 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) GOAL 1.0 Achieve a demonstrably improved regulatory environment for domestic nuclear facilities that comports with the NRC’s Principles of Good Regulation (i.e., independent, open, efficient, clear and reliable) and that avoids undue burden from existing, new or revised regulations. DELIVERABLE 1.1 Achieve regulatory efficiencies for second license renewal (SLR) that reduce time for application preparation and review and reduce the need for additional information requests from the NRC after application submittal. Develop alignment with the NRC that supports the lead plants’ development of applications and reduces the uncertainty for key technical areas such as RV inspection, cables and concrete inspection. YEAR-END SUMMARY Second license renewal activities have paved the way for the industry to move forward with the initial SLR applications in 2018. Through ongoing extensive dialog and demonstrations to familiarize the NRC with the operating experience and ongoing material research, the industry was able to gain overall alignment on scope and level of detail needed for SLR applications. This will lead to improved efficiency and regulatory certainty associated with SLRA reviews. NEI created industry guidance documents to consolidate best practices and enable more efficient application preparation and review. Lead plants are preparing to submit applications in 2018 to extend their operation to 80 years. The peer review process is robust and used to guard against any unrealized issues. RESULTS • Alignment with the NRC was demonstrated during three NEI-led technical panels on second license renewal guidance and component aging management at the international plant life management conference (PLM) in conjunction with the NRC leadership. • The NRC has committed to issue letters of intent to endorse NEI 17-01, Industry Guidance for Submitting an Application for SLR, and NEI 17-04, Model SLR New and Significant Assessment Approach for SAMA. These letters are scheduled to be issued by the end of this year. • Two SLR lead plants (Peach Bottom and Surry) are currently preparing their applications to be submitted to the NRC beginning in 2018, and Dominion just announced its intent to submit an SLR application for North Anna following Surry’s. • NUREG-2191 and NUREG-2192 (GALL and SRP) have been formally published by the NRC and are being used by the lead plants in the production of their second license renewal applications. Continued NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 5 Page 159 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Continued: Deliverable 1.1 • NEI worked with the NRC to improve the efficiency of the SLR application process that has resulted in reduction of the model review schedule from 22 months to 18 months and elimination of the NRC on-site scoping review. In addition, the NRC has agreed to utilize an electronic portal for documentation review that will reduce the quantity of RAIs. • The commission approved an increase in the maximum license term for uranium recovery facilities from 10 years to 20 years. Estimated lifecycle savings for 10 licensees: $72.5 million. RESULTS DELIVERABLE 1.2 Ensure that the NRC’s backfitting and regulatory analyses adhere to established regulations, guidance and commission direction, and that any changes to the relevant regulations and guidance continue to ensure that new or different requirements and interpretations are properly justified prior to being imposed on licensees. YEAR-END SUMMARY NEI’s work in this area has significantly contributed to a tangible, positive culture change at the NRC and reinvigorated the agency’s commitment to meaningfully implement its backfitting requirements. The durable changes to the NRC’s guidance and processes that are underway will help ensure that agency and industry resources remain focused on the most important safety and security issues, and that the NRC’s requirements evolve in a predictable, cost-justified manner. RESULTS • Based in part on NEI’s consistent advocacy on behalf of industry, the Committee to Review Generic Requirements (CRGR) has made over a dozen substantive recommendations to the EDO to improve implementation of the agency’s backfitting requirements, and has expanded its oversight efforts. For example, in September the CRGR provided NEI and the industry with a first-of-a-kind opportunity to discuss our remaining concerns regarding a draft final regulatory issue summary (RIS) dealing with the aging of safety-related equipment. In large part due to the feedback provided by industry at the September meeting, the CRGR recommended in October that the staff stop work on the RIS and not issue the document. The CRGR’s willingness to provide industry an opportunity to interact on the service life RIS was a substantial success and sign of significant culture change at the NRC with respect to backfitting. Persuading the CRGR to take swift action and recommend discontinuance of the RIS is a result that, practically speaking, would have been very unlikely even just a few short years ago. Further, in October the CRGR provided Duke with the opportunity to present its views on a facility-specific issue affecting the Oconee plant. This opportunity demonstrated CRGR’s willingness to provide oversight of facility-specific backfitting issues (in addition to its traditional role with respect to generic backfits). The CRGR is in the process of revising its charter to reflect its expanded role in ensuring that the NRC’s backfitting rules are properly implemented and that opportunities for stakeholder interaction—both on specific backfitting issues and on the state of the backfitting program more generally—will continue going forward. Continued NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 6 Page 160 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Continued: Deliverable 1.2 • NRC management (including a CRGR member) actively participated in industry backfitting training provided at this year’s licensing forum. NRC senior management is receiving updated backfitting training in November, and all NRC staff will be provided such training by the end of January 2018. NRC senior management has committed to making the agency’s backfitting training materials publicly available. Such materials have not been available in the past. • In February 2017, NEI submitted a letter to the senior management of NRR and RES requesting that they withdraw Revision 3 to Reg. Guide 8.7 “Instructions for Recording and Reporting Occupational Radiation Exposure Data.” NEI argued that Rev. 3 contained an unanalyzed backfit, which was not made available for public comment prior to being included in the final version of the RG. Specifically, if left in place, Rev. 3 would have significantly changed how licensees determine which employees must be monitored for radiation exposure. In addition, if adopted, the position in Rev. 3 would have negatively impacted implementation of a DNP efficiency bulletin. In response to the concerns expressed in NEI’s letter, the NRC staff issued Draft Rev. 4 to RG 8.7 in October for stakeholder comment, removing the language that contained the unanalyzed backfit and re-establishing the agency’s long-standing position with respect to employee monitoring that was articulated in all iterations of Reg. Guide 8.7 prior to Rev. 3, as well as in other agency guidance. RESULTS DELIVERABLE 1.3 Improve the NRC’s used fuel and decommissioning regulations, including ongoing rulemaking, and ensure that associated technical bases allow more timely and efficient licensing of power reactors, shutdown plants and ISFSIs. YEAR-END SUMMARY Industry’s competitive position has been significantly strengthened by NEI efforts to improve used fuel and decommissioning regulations and guidance. As a result of these efforts, NRC’s ongoing decommissioning rulemaking progressed in a risk-informed, graded direction consistent with industry policy. In addition, improvements in used fuel regulatory efficiency were achieved by streamlining dry storage licensing and change control processes and by clarifying guidance on spent fuel criticality analyses. RESULTS • The NRC’s ongoing decommissioning rulemaking continued to advance in a direction consistent with industry’s goal of establishing a regulatory framework that supports a more efficient transition from operating to decommissioning status. In 2017, the NRC published a draft regulatory basis document that strongly reflected industry’s 2016 comments on the NRC’s advanced notice of proposed rulemaking. This draft embodied a risk-informed, graded approach to regulatory requirements as a function of the progressively reduced risk associated with the status of the fuel as a plant progresses through decommissioning. NEI submitted industry comments on the draft regulatory basis that further reinforced this direction. Rulemaking remains on track for completion by the end of 2019. Continued NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 7 Page 161 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Continued: Deliverable 1.3 • By the end of 2017, the NRC had renewed (for 40 years) licenses and certificates of compliance for 24 independent spent fuel storage installations using the innovative learning aging management approach pioneered by NEI in NEI 14-03 “Guidance for Operations-Based Aging Management for Dry Cask Storage.” • This year, the NRC and industry successfully applied the NEI regulatory issue resolution protocol to develop a graded approach to dry storage licensing. Criteria for this streamlined approach were agreed to and a pilot of the approach, involving NRC review of a TN Americas’ certificate of compliance amendment based on these criteria, is underway and proceeding on schedule for completion in 2018. • In 2017, NEI and NRC reached alignment on resolution on all 11 fundamental and key issues previously identified as impediments to effective implementation of the dry storage change control process (10 CFR 72.48). This effort is documented in industry guidance (NEI 12-04), which is on track for NRC endorsement in 2018. • NEI’s efforts to stabilize the regulatory framework governing spent fuel pools reached completion in 2017 with the submittal to the NRC of spent fuel criticality analysis guidance in NEI 12-16 and all supporting EPRI documents. These and other used fuel regulatory framework documents are now in the processes of being endorsed by the NRC. Industry also closed out generic letter 16-01 on neutron absorbers for the majority of the plants and reached agreement with the NRC on an innovative plan to use industry-wide information to close out the remainder. RESULTS DELIVERABLE 1.4 YEAR-END SUMMARY RESULTS Achieve closure of existing technical and licensing issues, including establishment of a process to address low-risk licensing basis issues, and resolve emerging issues in a timely and effective manner. NEI focused efforts to align the industry around a set of operating plant regulatory priorities. To facilitate communication of the priorities by member companies, the “operating plant regulatory priorities” document was developed as an easy-to-use living reference for CNOs and others. As a result, industry regulatory priorities are receiving increased attention by congressional staff and NRC senior management, and progress is being made on key issues. NEI also resolved several issues affecting on-site and off-site emergency preparedness (EP) programs. The successful EP outcomes minimized cost and schedule impacts from recent regulatory guidance changes, eliminated unnecessary emergency declarations for certain events, and corrected a questionable FEMA billing practice. • NEI regulatory priorities have been identified in a briefing book that was developed to provide key information and talking points on each of the priorities. This briefing book is updated at least quarterly to reflect the progress and successes towards achieving each goal. Continued NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 8 Page 162 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Continued: Deliverable 1.4 • The disciplined licensing review, regulatory performance dashboard, degraded grid voltage and multiple spurious operations issues are considered resolved. The prototype for the regulatory performance dashboard was recently developed and will be further developed in 2018. The first data-populated dashboard will be based on fourth quarter 2017 data. • The tornado missile risk evaluator and reduction in baseline inspections are considered resolved based on good, positive progress expected to continue through the end of 2017. The real time tracking methodology issue has been stagnant as we continue to wait for the NRC to fully implement its new tracking system. • The NRC has deferred the development of the process to address lowrisk licensing basis issues [design compliance enforcement discretion (DCED)] until 2018 to allow the staff to focus on the industry effort to develop operability determination guidance. The industry team has met several times with the staff and is on-track to submit draft guidance to the staff by early 2018. • NEI led extensive interaction with the NRC to mitigate potential impacts on licensees from the revised EPA PAG manual. As a result, the NRC will not require LARs for changes to EALs, protective action decisionmaking schemes or dose assessment programs. Staff also agreed to allow licensees leeway concerning what aspects of the manual will be implemented and to determine their own implementation schedule in conjunction with their state off-site response organizations. • Through an EP FAQ approved in 2017, the NRC has agreed to new emergency action level (EAL) guidance that will no longer require the declaration of an alert when there is an equipment failure accompanied by an industrial hazard such as a fire or explosion. This positive outcome will preclude unnecessary alert declarations, result in fewer ERO activations/call-outs and improve stakeholder confidence. • NEI was able to persuade FEMA to end a practice involving the misuse of utility fees paid into the radiological emergency preparedness program (REPP) fund. Prior to this success, FEMA was using utility fees to pay REPP personnel during periods when they were deployed to respond to emergencies unrelated to nuclear plants. RESULTS DELIVERABLE 1.5 Achieve more predictable, efficient and timely regulatory approvals for current and future applicants by implementing actions to: (1) apply lessons learned from new plant licensing and construction experience; (2) achieve industry milestones for SMRs, including emergency preparedness and security requirements; and (3) implement action plans to establish a staged design approval process and risk-informed, performance-based regulatory structure for advanced non-LWR reactors. YEAR-END SUMMARY Although there have been challenges, new plant activities have made significant progress on applying licensing lessons learned, on NuScale SMR and TVA ESP applications, and on modernizing regulatory requirements and guidance for advanced reactors. Continued NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 9 Page 163 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Continued: Deliverable 1.5 RESULTS • The preliminary safety evaluation report (PSER) sections have been drafted for the TVA ESP and RAIs have been issued, and the NuScale review appears to be ahead of the published schedule. • Three of the four white papers associated with the licensing modernization project have been completed and sent to the NRC for comment. The one remaining white paper is on schedule to be completed in 2017. This work provides the foundation for the development of a more safety-focused licensing framework for advanced non-light water reactors that can be utilized under existing Part 50 and Part 52 regulations. • NEI submitted a white paper to the NRC to clarify staged licensing under existing NRC (e.g., standard design approval) processes, and the NRC has revised its regulatory review roadmap to reference the document. In addition, NEI has developed and is working with the NRC on a regulatory engagement plan for providing examples of acceptable licensing pathways for advanced reactor designs. This effort is expected to be completed in 2018. • NEI has taken the following actions to address new plant licensing lessons learned: ○○ Sustained NEI efforts to eliminate Tier 2* led to an important change in NRC practice going forward. In SECY-17-0075 and subsequent meetings, the NRC announced that the focus will be on assuring the proper scope of Tier 1 versus Tier 2, and that use of Tier 2* will now be voluntary and at the discretion of the design certification applicant. In a letter to the commission, NEI requested that the NRC clarify and document the new practice and also work with Southern Company to relieve Tier 2* burden at Vogtle 3/4. ○○ NEI provided proposals and began to engage with the NRC in 2017 on two other important Part 52 lessons learned: (1) establishing “first principles” on the scope of Tier 1/ITAAC (white paper submitted in June); and (2) providing greater certainty for COL applicants that reference a completed design certification. These activities are expected to mature in 2018. ○○ NEI has developed a report that provides evidence of NRC’s regulatory creep for Part 52-related licensing reviews that has occurred over the course of the last decade. The report highlights the increasing level of detail and amounts of information that the NRC demands to be able to conduct its review and will be used to help change behaviors by NRC management and staff. • NEI has developed a white paper on developing the fuel cycle infrastructure for advanced non-light water reactors as a basis for discussing regulatory and R&D issues with NRC and DOE, respectively. • NEI efforts to establish emergency preparedness (EP) and security requirements appropriate to SMRs and advanced non-LWR reactors gained momentum this year. NRC published a final regulatory basis document for EP rulemaking that strongly reflected industry comments submitted earlier in the year, and the staff agreed to submit a SECY paper to the commission in early 2018 seeking policy direction on a similar rulemaking for physical security. NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 10 Page 164 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) DELIVERABLE 1.6 YEAR-END SUMMARY RESULTS DELIVERABLE 1.7 YEAR-END SUMMARY Develop a success path for modernization of the digital I&C regulatory framework to increase efficiency and reduce licensing uncertainty for implementation of digital solutions at existing, new and SMR plants. While NEI is not completely satisfied with the pace of progress in the digital I&C, substantial headway was made in achieving clarity on regulatory policy and implementing guidance. The gaps between the NRC and industry positions on several major concepts were closed, allowing progress toward an improved licensing framework. Three engineering guidance documents have been drafted, and several major products are well underway and, despite some delays, are expected to be completed early next year. • RIS 2002-22 Supplement 1, Guidance on Licensing Digital Upgrades, has been completed and is in final administrative review at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This represents the first guidance issued by the NRC under the initiative to modernize digital infrastructure. The RIS reflects significant input from NEI and the Digital I&C Working Group and will state that digital upgrades can be implemented under 10 CFR 50.59 for low safety-significant, safety-related components. • The Digital Modification LAR Industry Working Group has completed major Revision 2 to NRC ISG-06. Significant industry issues are being favorably addressed (with NRC agreement) including content of the LAR application, treatment of digital system testing before LAR approval and NRC review schedule improvement. Completion of this guidance document will allow industry to submit a LAR for a major digital modification in 2018. NRC is expected to issue a letter of intent to endorse the revised ISG-6 in 1Q 2018. • The NEI 96-07 appendix D upgrade team has made significant progress is reaching NRC concurrence on key sections of the document. Much progress was made at a three-day public meeting with the NRC in September in coming to agreement on the content of the screening and evaluation sections of the document. The current schedule should support the goal of the NRC providing a pre-endorsement “acceptable for use” letter by the end of 2017 that will allow utilities to utilize the upgraded guidance to perform more accurate 10 CFR 50.59 evaluations for digital modifications. Use risk insights to better focus industry resources on programs and processes that enhance safety focus and efficiency. Substantial progress was made toward more effective use of risk insights to allow flexibility in operations. In addition, the NRC is recognizing and allowing the industry to have more control of risk assessments, resulting in shorter NRC review times and cost savings. In one case, the savings are expected to reduce the cost by as much as $600,000 per site. Due to persistent industry pressure, NRC management has made some key moves to better support industry in achieving the goal of enhancing focus on safety and reducing unnecessary burden. While more work needs to be done to realize additional improvements, licensees now have more options for using risk information to improve efficiency of plant operations. Continued NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 11 Page 165 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Continued: Deliverable 1.7 • In response to a briefing requested by the industry, the commission issued an SRM directing NRC staff to provide expectations for improvements to enable more widespread use of risk information in all regulatory activities. • Over 30 PRA peer review finding (facts & observations) closures were conducted, resulting in simplified risk-informed applications and substantially reducing anticipated NRC review fees by up to $600,000 per site. The program has successfully reduced the size of risk-informed LARs submitted in 2017, and NEI expects to see far fewer RAIs related to PRA models in 2018. • The industry and the NRC have reached agreement on issues that have been preventing acceptance of new risk-informed completion time (TSTF-505) applications and have thus enabled forward progress on five in-process applications, as well as the issuance of the SE for Vogtle’s application for this program. Despite this resolution, administrative hurdles to acceptance of new applications are not expected to be removed until January 2018. RESULTS DELIVERABLE 1.8 Reach and implement a policy decision on the prioritization of industry resources to accelerate the availability of advanced fuels that will result in beneficial changes to the NRC’s regulatory framework by protecting against hydrogen production, fuel melt and radiological release during severe accidents. YEAR-END SUMMARY Throughout 2017, NEI removed significant uncertainty from the path forward for ATF implementation. NEI aligned the industry and was able to garner support and awareness that led to more NRC focus and additional funding in the area. A number of challenges remain to be addressed before full implementation can be assured in a meaningful timeframe. RESULTS • In partnership with the Accident Tolerant Fuel (ATF) Working Group, NEI has more clearly articulated the path forward for ATF. • Extensive NEI outreach on the Hill resulted in recognition of the value and importance of ATF by Senate and House Appropriations Committees, and their markups reflect funding levels consistent with industry interests. • NRC’s senior leadership has demonstrated strong interest in ATF and has established an inter-office steering committee composed of agency senior executives. Industry is communicating frequently with this body to assure alignment on the regulatory path forward. • Firm commitments have been made to install lead test assemblies for all three lead technologies in commercial reactor cores in either 2018 or 2019. • Independent technical assessments of the safety and economic benefits are complete and reflect a positive outlook for significant benefits in both normal operations and accident scenarios. A business case has been developed based upon these assessments. These results are being used to develop roadmaps identifying a comprehensive set of actions that must be taken as prerequisites to achieving full ATF implementation in the mid-2020s. NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 12 Page 166 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) GOAL 2.0 Durable, bipartisan political support for nuclear energy exists at the federal and state levels, reflecting strengthened NEI influence and public and policymaker confidence in nuclear energy. DELIVERABLE 2.1 YEAR-END SUMMARY RESULTS Support effective federal and state policy, including congressional oversight, preserving and extending reactor operations, and developing new reactor projects. These efforts will incorporate advocacy program activities, including coalition building, and outreach to the new administration and newly elected members of Congress and their staff on industry operations/benefits and policy priorities. NEI has gained ground and built a strong framework for achieving success in support of effective federal and state nuclear energy policy. There were significant federal and state level legislative developments to preserve and sustain support for nuclear reactor operations. However, despite these positive developments, more is to be done to build on this progress to advance new reactor projects and used fuel legislation in 2018. Preserve our exemplary nuclear fleet through fair treatment in electricity markets • NEI, working with EEI and member companies, urged the White House and Congress to nominate and confirm FERC commissioners expeditiously. The Senate confirmed by unanimous consent Neil Chatterjee and Rob Powelson, which restored a quorum at FERC. In addition, Kevin McIntyre and Richard Glick were approved by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and by the full Senate. • After two years and two legislative sessions, the Connecticut Legislature passed and Governor Malloy then signed S.B. 1501, a bill authorizing a zero carbon procurement program that puts the zerocarbon emitting generation from Millstone Nuclear Station on an even playing field with other zero carbon sources. See Deliverable 4.2 for further update. • NEI interacted with 28 speakers of state houses at the State Legislative Leaders Foundation and hundreds of legislators at eight national events the Republican Legislative Campaign Committee and Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee hosted. NEI arranged, with EEI and AGA, a unique legislator and state regulator educational forum at the Council of State Governments Policy Academy on Valuing Baseload. Both DGA and RGA provided forums for nuclear messaging during the third and fourth quarters, as did ALEC and SGAC. In 2017, NEI and engaged in over 50 national meetings of state elected officials. Continued NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 13 Page 167 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Continued: Deliverable 2.1 • RESULTS NEI has touched the largest number of state elected officials through our partnership with the National Conference of State Legislatures (NSCL). Working with NCSL staff to organize and deliver nuclear information to elected officials, state champions have been created all over the country. This is illustrated through legislative activity in state houses doubling in the last year, which is roughly 10 times the amount of state activity in the last several years. Create industry sustainability via favorable federal policy and improved regulatory framework • Deliverable 3.4 captures the used fuel legislation update. • NEI worked with the House Appropriations Committee to again reduce NRC’s budget from FY2017, which resulted in a reduction of the NRC budget by an additional $85 million. This represents an overall reduction of at least $139 million (close to $800,000 per reactor) since FY2014. • In partnership with industry, NEI worked to ensure broad bipartisan support of legislation (S. 512 Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act) that reforms the NRC fee structure by capping annual fees and reducing corporate support. This bill is pending consideration by the full Senate. Innovate, commercialize and deploy new nuclear • The House and Senate have included an extension to the production tax credit (PTC) to facilities that begin operation after December 31, 2020, including SMRs, and also permits qualified public entities to transfer the credit to an eligible project partner in the tax reform bills. The House bill, H.R. 1551, was approved by the Ways and Means Committee and adopted by the full House; and the Senate bill, S. 666, was introduced. The House and Senate have strategies in place to pass the PTC extension through another legislative vehicle if tax reform does not move forward. NEI has been leading industry efforts to move House and Senate bills to enactment in time to support Southern and UAMPS decisions on their new build projects. • NEI worked with both House and Senate Armed Services and Appropriations Committees staff to ensure authorization and funding for MOX. Both Armed Services Committees authorized funding for continued construction of the MOX project and the House Appropriations Energy and Water Subcommittee funded the project at $340 million, equal to prior year’s funding. Compete globally • The Senate Banking Committee held its Export-Import Bank nominations hearing. All the nominees received favorable treatment from committee members except for Scott Garrett, who received strong, bipartisan criticism for his past opposition to the bank. Two members, Richard Shelby (R-AL) and Pat Toomey (R-PA), said that they would stall the nominations of the other nominees if Garrett’s nomination proves to be unsuccessful. Continued NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 14 Page 168 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Continued: Deliverable 2.1 RESULTS DELIVERABLE 2.2 YEAR-END SUMMARY RESULTS DELIVERABLE 2.3 YEAR-END SUMMARY RESULTS NEI engaged in several notable activities that supported all of the above objectives. • NEI has effectively built relationships with key staff and decision makers at the White House, the Department of Energy and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. This includes outreach to the new administration and newly elected members of Congress and their staff. • The NEI PAC co-hosted 88 events in 2017 raising over $2 million for pro-nuclear members of Congress. Prevent re-imposition of the uranium D&D tax, identify alternative means of financing cleanup of the federal government’s legacy enrichment plants and build political support for that approach, to avoid placing additional financial burden on U.S. nuclear plants. Efforts to prevent the reimplementation of a $200 million annual fee were successful. • NEI laid the groundwork for congressional consideration of alternative methods to finance GDP cleanup. After targeting the House and Senate Appropriations Committees, NEI successfully prevented reimplementation of a $200 million annual fee placed on the industry. Position well-qualified NRC nominees to be favorably considered by Congress. Efforts to ensure Kristine Svinicki remained NRC chairman and to position additional NRC nominees to be favorably considered by Congress yielded success. • NEI shared names of potential candidates with the Trump administration and worked with member companies to urge Congress to communicate with the White House the need to nominate and confirm commissioners. • The Senate confirmed by an 88-9 vote Kristine Svinicki for another 5-year term. The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee approved Annie Caputo and David Wright to fill vacancies and Jeff Baran for another term. The expectation is that the full Senate will approve their nominations in the fourth quarter of 2017. NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 15 Page 169 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) DELIVERABLE 2.4 Implement a targeted campaign that leverages NEI and member-company resources to communicate the value of nuclear energy and U.S. leadership and increase support for the industry among opinion leaders. YEAR-END SUMMARY Significant progress has been made to make NEI’s voice louder and to increase the number of supporters delivering messages to influence policy, while at the same time reducing costs. NEI will continuously seek to leverage industry and external voices to influence opinion leaders about the value of nuclear. RESULTS • NEI executed an aggressive strategy for expanding media engagements generating more than 4,000 media hits in 2017, including message delivery in top tier media like Forbes, The Washington Post, USA Today and The Wall Street Journal. Executives appeared on air with national hosts Hugh Hewitt, Lars Larson and John Rush. • NEI engaged third parties to engage with media through interviews and op-eds, including former Senator Saxby Chambliss, Senator Lindsey Graham, environmentalist Michael Shellenberger, former EPA Administrator Carol Browner and former Senator Judd Gregg. • NEI strengthened relationships with key reporters from Politico, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post and The New York Times, interactions that yielded coverage. • In conjunction with the Department of Energy’s notice of public rulemaking (NOPR) related to grid resilience and reliability, NEI leadership was quoted in more than 200 outlets including The Washington Post and USA Today. NEI also developed supportive commentary that ran in influential outlets such as The Hill, The Washington Times, The Philadelphia Inquirer, The Connecticut Mirror and National Public Radio. NEI placed Paul Stockton, an internationally recognized leader in U.S. national security and foreign policy, before media outlets including an appearance on the nationally syndicated Lars Larson radio program, a national security and nuclear energy Q&A with Forbes and an opinion piece. NEI also published a blog post on the national security value of preserving energy diversity on the grid by Caitlin Durkovich, a former assistant secretary of Homeland Security. • NEI partnered with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to cohost the Millennial Nuclear Caucus, bringing together more than 50 millennials from the current fleet, new reactor design companies, congressional offices, DOE, think tanks, policy organizations and media outlets to discuss how to move the industry forward. More than 5.9 million impressions were earned. • The implementation of the restructured Nuclear Matters coalition integration with NEI has provided strategic industry benefits, resulted in a closer alliance between Nuclear Matter and NEI, and realized $6 million in savings to member companies. Continued NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 16 Page 170 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Continued: Deliverable 2.4 • Nuclear Matters continues to drive grassroots supporters to action nationally through its new website. Since September 1, more than 2,000 advocates have taken action, sending over 5,000 messages to lawmakers. Nuclear Matters digital properties now include approximately 412,000 social media followers, over 17,000 supporters opted-in to the database receiving regular updates and nearly 7,500 advocates who contacted elected officials. • Nuclear Matters generated grassroots support for the legislative success in Connecticut and continues to play a critical role in communications and advocacy efforts in Ohio, New Jersey and Georgia. • Nuclear Matters developed a grassroots campaign to support public comments voicing support for nuclear energy to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, including comments from Advocacy Council member former Senator Judd Gregg and nearly 800 advocates. • Nuclear Matters created a plant mobilization toolkit that will be used to engage plant employees across the country, providing them with the resources and tools to become nuclear advocates. RESULTS DELIVERABLE 2.5 YEAR-END SUMMARY RESULTS Drive the adoption of digital communications tools across the industry to support industry branding and advocate policy objectives. Transform their use in emergency response communications by NEI members and work with relevant federal authorities to encourage regulatory acceptance of these new standards and practices. Following an internal audit, NEI increased the efficiency of communications tools to reduce costs and improve effectiveness of the products. For example, NEI achieved an increase in digital communications engagement across our three key platforms and is also providing a weekly stream of digital content for member company communicators. NEI leveraged responses to cybersecurity and natural disaster events to strengthen relationships with federal partners and amplify messaging on the resiliency of nuclear energy. • NEI launched a new product, Nuclear Communicators Weekly, which combined features from the former publications Social Media Digest and Tuesday Morning Briefing. It includes digital content that members can use in their own social and digital channels. The first edition proved successful with higher than average open and click through rates. • NEI digital platforms saw growth in followers across all three major social networks: Twitter (20.4 percent increase), LinkedIn (18.8 percent increase) and Facebook (8.4 percent increase). In addition to subscriber growth, NEI used its social platforms to attract the attention of opinion leaders like Energy Secretary Rick Perry, Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) and Dana Perino of Fox News. NEI’s LinkedIn content strategy was highlighted as best in class for public affairs and thought leadership by the Public Affairs Council. The article placed NEI in league with other top D.C. associations. Continued NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 17 Page 171 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Continued: Deliverable 2.5 • NEI’s new website is on track to launch in the first quarter of 2018. The new site will be simplified, highly visual, and driven by NNES and quality user experience. The goal is to increase engagement on key issues across online platforms. • NEI is expanding its digital assets with an original animated video that targets Ohioans in key areas with a primacy on online sharing and engagement. The video addresses plant closures with a personalized story and a more accessible tone than previous content. The goal of this content is to persuade advocates to support proposed state legislation. • NEI conducted research on the digital advertising campaign that showed a softening of opposition to nuclear energy (+3 percent net approval). NEI also saw an increase in outright support in the critical 35-49 year old demographic (+9 percent net approval) as well as a slight decrease in opposition from women (+4 percent net approval). One key takeaway: The more frequently viewers see our ads, the greater the bump in net approval. Among viewers who saw our ads 11 times or more, the net increase in approval was +13 percent. • Following the cybersecurity attack on a member plant in Kansas, NEI worked closely with the affected facility, federal partners (DHS, FBI, DOE, NRC and NSC) and other industry associations (EEI) to coordinate communications response. NEI made a deliberate effort to build stronger relationships and processes for collaboration with federal partners following the incident. • Hurricanes Harvey and Irma provided fresh tests for coordination with federal partners and industry associations. NEI’s media team actively engaged national media to highlight the performance by the South Texas Project facility through Harvey. Both Bloomberg and Forbes chronicled site workers as well as the unit’s resiliency. NEI media worked closely with the Washington Post’s Steve Mufson in advance of Irma, providing the Post with preparedness and emergency planning strategies of U.S. nuclear plants. NEI staff also discussed facility readiness in commercial and satellite radio appearances. RESULTS DELIVERABLE 2.6 YEAR-END SUMMARY RESULTS Identify an effective strategy for a K-12 education program to familiarize the next generation with nuclear energy. A K-12 education program is a priority for NEI and DOE. By educating young people about the value and possibilities of nuclear technology, nuclear advocates are creating a new generation of consumers who appreciate the attributes of the industry. • ANS and NEI established a K-12 Executive Advisory Committee (K-12 EAC) to help ANS identify a strategy to improve the knowledge and acceptance of nuclear technologies with citizens and future decisionmakers. The ANS K-12 EAC has agreed to advance the resulting program and is in the process of fundraising to support this effort. NEI and ANS are jointly raising the awareness of the program by presenting to other stakeholders, including NEA, IAEA and DOE. Based on expressed interest, ANS has agreed to front the first-year costs for the program. Accordingly, a comprehensive middle school nuclear curriculum will be developed and launched for Nuclear Science Week in 2018. NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 18 Page 172 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) GOAL 3.0 Policies are in place to ensure that nuclear provides a growing portion of U.S. electricity supply. DELIVERABLE 3.1 Establish supportive policies for SMR commercialization, communicate the benefits of and need for SMRs, resolve generic institutional issues, and support the activities of the SMR Start organization. YEAR-END SUMMARY NEI’s aggressive lobbying resulted in significant progress in congressional appropriations for SMRs in FY2017 and in extending the production tax credit. NEI’s advocacy for SMRs, including support of SMR Start, was highly effective in improving support for SMRs by Congress, DOE and other policymakers. RESULTS DELIVERABLE 3.2 YEAR-END SUMMARY • Consistent with the requests by NEI and SMR Start, Congress appropriated $95 million in FY2017 for the SMR Licensing Technical Support program and provides robust funding of $90 million in the FY2018 appropriations bills that can be used for SMRs. • The Senate Energy and Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee formed a task force to identify actions the government could take to continue supporting SMR commercialization. NEI led industry’s participation in a meeting with the House Energy and Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee chairman to identify actions the government could take to continue supporting SMR commercialization and followed up with recommendations for committee actions. • NEI facilitated SMR Start’s activities including the publications of a number of SMR Start advocacy documents, which positively influenced the FY2017 and FY2018 appropriations bills as well the structure of DOE’s future funding opportunity announcements that will be more flexible and focused on meeting industry’s needs. State-level advocacy has positively influenced the discussion of Idaho state support with the LINE Commission and potential legislation in 2018, and Tennessee state support for SMR manufacturing. • See deliverable 2.1 for a discussion on the production tax credit. Establish supportive policies and programs (e.g., federally funded costshare program and RD&D programs) that support the commercialization of non-light water advanced reactors in the 2030-2035 timeframe. There were significant legislative developments in support of advanced reactor development. NEI’s efforts helped to shape the content of the authorizing bills introduced and helped ensure that the appropriations bills passed in the House and Senate are supportive of advanced reactors. Despite encouraging developments, the final appropriations bills have not been passed and the legislation that was introduced has not been enacted. NEI’s advocacy efforts continue to build on these developments and enlarge the coalition supporting advanced reactors. Continued NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 19 Page 173 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Continued: Deliverable 3.2 • NEI worked with Argonne, Oak Ridge and Idaho National Laboratories to organize an event on the Hill to highlight advanced reactor R&D and industry and lab partnerships. The early September event included six TED-style talks. The speakers were the associate lab directors for ANL and ORNL, the GAIN director from INL, the president of X-energy, the R&D director from Southern Company Services, and the CEO of Oklo. The event was well attended with over 80 participants including Hill staff and administration representatives. Senator Risch, co-chair of the Senate Lab Caucus, opened the event. • In 2017, NEI continued to highlight the gap in fuel cycle infrastructure to support fabrication of fuels with enrichments above five percent and below 20 percent for many advanced reactor designs and at least on advanced LWR fuel. NEI developed a white paper to highlight the regulatory issues and has begun engagement with the NRC. The continued focus on this topic has resulted in significant attention by DOE. NEI will continue to pursue this issue. • In 2017 DOE established an industry council for its nuclear energy advanced modeling and simulation (NEAMS) program. An NEI representative chairs this group. The industry council will help ensure that the NEAMS program appropriately supports the development needs of the advanced reactor community. • The House and Senate passed FY2018 appropriations bills that are favorable to the DOE Office of Nuclear Energy with $969 million in the House bill and $917 million in the Senate bill. This stands in contrast to the administration’s request of only $703 million. NEI’s engagement earlier in the year helped ensure these positive outcomes, and NEI continues to engage regularly with appropriation committees as the FY2018 process continues. NEI organized a letter co-signed by 21 organizations and companies in support of positive language in both the House and Senate bills that directly supports advanced reactor and SMR R&D, licensing and first-of-a-kind engineering. • Several bills, listed below, were introduced during 2017 addressing NEI priorities for advanced reactors, e.g., efficient regulatory framework, licensing fee reform, the need for a versatile fast neutron source, cost-sharing programs, national lab support and advanced reactor demonstration projects. Although none of these bills were passed, NEI continues to engage with the various congressional offices in support of these bills going forward into 2018: RESULTS ○○ S. 512 Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act (NEIMA) (passed out of the Senate EPW Committee by a bipartisan vote of 18-3) ○○ H.R. 431 Nuclear Energy Innovation Capabilities Act ○○ S. 97 Nuclear Energy Innovation Capabilities Act ○○ H.R. 590 Advanced Nuclear Technology Development Act of 2017 (passed House) ○○ H.R. 589 Department of Energy Research and Innovation Act (passed House – includes H.R. 431) ○○ H.R. 4378 Nuclear Energy Research and Infrastructure act of 2017. Continued NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 20 Page 174 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Continued: Deliverable 3.2 • The Energy Innovation Reform Project and the Energy Options Network released a report on the cost of advanced nuclear in late July. NEI hosted a two-hour event to roll out the report that compares cost for “nth” of kind reactors from seven different advanced non-light water reactor companies and NuScale. These results, which were highlighted in at least one press publication, indicate that advanced nuclear has the potential for significant reduction in cost compared to the currently available large LWRs. • The DOE Gateway for Accelerated Innovation in Nuclear (GAIN) issued a second round of small business vouchers to 14 companies to support advanced reactor developments. The vouchers are worth a combined $4.2 million. NEI’s expression of support to DOE and involvement in the GAIN Executive Advisory Committee helped ensure this success. RESULTS DELIVERABLE 3.3 YEAR-END SUMMARY RESULTS Improve U.S. companies’ commercial prospects in key markets by ensuring effective support and coordination for U.S. nuclear exports in the new administration, promoting market access through trade missions and embassy coordination, and ensuring that the next administration implements reforms to the export authorization process. On nuclear trade issues, NEI effectively engaged with familiar faces in the White House and Department of Energy. This engagement resulted in substantial progress toward effective White House coordination of nuclear trade policy when the NSC restored a key civil nuclear energy director position. Partly as a result of NEI advocacy, U.S. companies were added to a list of suppliers invited to bid on nuclear plants in Saudi Arabia and Part 810 authorizations were successfully expedited to permit the bids. Those activities, plus a trade mission to Mexico and multiple events with visiting foreign delegations, significantly advanced U.S. access to new and expanding foreign markets. Major progress toward competitive export financing was achieved with the Trump administration’s reversal to support Ex-Im Bank and nominate a full slate of directors, which received positive Senate hearings. Critical executive and legislative steps remain on each of these issues. • NEI facilitated U.S. industry participation in Saudi Arabia: ○○ After Saudi Arabia announced a large LWR tender without plans to invite U.S. participation, NEI worked with DOE and the Saudi nuclear development agency to ensure that U.S. industry was invited. As a result of these efforts, U.S. companies have been invited to respond to the large reactor RFI. ○○ Because Part 810 specific authorizations threatened to hold up U.S. participation in the Saudi tender process, NEI advocated to DOE for expediting Part 810 authorizations for U.S. responses to the Saudi RFI. NEI also prepared a briefing document that was used by U.S. government and U.S. suppliers to educate Saudi government officials about Part 810 assurances. As a result of NEI’s advocacy, DOE has readied a package for the secretary’s signature that only awaits Saudi government assurances. Continued NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 21 Page 175 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) ○○ NEI has worked with the Departments of Energy and Commerce to promote U.S. commercial engagement in the Saudi nuclear program beyond the large LWR tender. As a result, the DOE and DOC will host a roundtable in December and have proposed to KA-CARE an NEI-led trade mission in the first quarter of 2018. Continued: Deliverable 3.3 RESULTS • As a result of meetings with White House officials responsible for international and domestic energy policy, the Trump administration launched a thorough review of U.S. nuclear energy policy and decided to reappoint an NSC director to coordinate civil nuclear policy. The director has been selected and is awaiting final clearance. • As a result of NEI outreach to relevant members of Congress and key congressional staff, a provision that would have harmed the U.S. commercial nuclear industry was deleted from legislation to sanction Russia for interference in the 2016 presidential election. This legislation was later approved by Congress and signed into law by the president. • NEI’s advocacy on export control reform elevated the profile of Part 810 reform at the White House and DOE and framed the issue as a top priority for DOE’s reduction of regulatory burdens. With NEI members and key stakeholders, NEI developed a list of priority reforms that it proposed in response to the DOE’s RFI on reduction of regulatory burden and reiterated in other ways. ○○ NEI also forged a more cooperative relationship with DOE on export control matters during 2017 and identified with DOE multiple areas for collaboration in compliance outreach. NEI also began a dialogue with DOE on Part 810 reform proposals. • Due to industry advocacy in which NEI played a key role, the Trump administration nominated a full slate of five directors to the board of the Export-Import Bank. In Congress, NEI coordinated outreach from nuclear suppliers in Idaho to Sen. Crapo, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee (who had voted against reauthorizing the Ex-Im Bank). Partly as a result of NEI’s outreach, Sen. Crapo stated his support for making the bank fully operational and on November 1 held a hearing on the board nominees. See earlier discussion in deliverable 2.1. • NEI led a June trade mission to Mexico with official sponsorship from the U.S. Department of Commerce and the Mexican Secretariat of Energy and 16 registered delegates representing the breadth of the fuel cycle. The mission provided participants with an update on the status of nuclear energy development plans and opportunities to meet with senior Mexican government and industry leaders. NEI also has promoted NEI member access to foreign markets through webinars and meetings with senior-level foreign delegations. ○○ NEI also organized a trade mission to the quadrennial IAEA Ministerial in Abu Dhabi that enabled U.S. delegates representing 10 U.S. organizations to meet with representatives from Canada, Indonesia, Japan, Jordan, Mexico, the Philippines, Saudi Arabia and Ukraine. • NEI hosted visiting foreign government and industry delegations from the Czech Republic, Poland, Argentina, South Korea and Japan for meetings with NEI member companies. NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 22 Page 176 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) DELIVERABLE 3.4 YEAR-END SUMMARY RESULTS Engage federal policymakers and opinion leaders to achieve introduction of comprehensive used fuel legislation supported by industry and resumption of funding for the Yucca Mountain project. Despite encouraging developments in the House, it remains unclear whether the Senate will support comprehensive used fuel legislation and funding to resolve the stalemate that began in 2010 and establish a sustainable used fuel management program. NEI’s increased efforts to educate key congressional staff and deepen our alliances with influential third-party groups helped achieve progress in the House. NEI’s Executive Committee Used Fuel Task Force, Integrated Used Fuel Working Group and Governmental Affairs Used Fuel Task Force are leading these industry efforts. • In June, the House Energy and Commerce Committee passed, by a bipartisan 49-4 vote, a bill (H.R. 3053) that would advance both Yucca Mountain and consolidated interim storage. Recent concerns voiced by House appropriators over so-called “mandatory spending” in the bill have presented a significant obstacle and may prevent it from reaching the House floor. NEI, however, has continued to actively encourage congressional leadership and staff to move the legislation and also is spearheading efforts with NEI members to garner widespread support (groups ranging from conservative think tanks to labor unions) to help ensure the bill receives House floor consideration and passes. • Building on the progress of H.R. 3053 and the administration’s budget request seeking funding for both Yucca Mountain and interim storage, NEI has worked to facilitate appropriations, possibly as part of an FY2018 spending package, for moving forward with both Yucca and consolidated interim storage in parallel. In June, House appropriators approved a budget that included $150 million for Yucca Mountain ($120 million for DOE, $30 million for NRC). Senate appropriators, on the other hand, are proposing $35 million primarily for interim storage (and $0 for Yucca Mountain). NEI is working to help facilitate a potential compromise that results in support for both interim storage and Yucca Mountain. • NEI rallied allies to sign a letter to House and Senate leadership calling for legislative action related to nuclear waste management, in particular funding for priorities in FY2018. The signers included American Nuclear Society, Decommissioned Plant Coalition, National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, NEI, U.S. Nuclear Infrastructure Council and the Nuclear Waste Strategy Coalition. • Briefing has been completed in the March 2017 lawsuit filed by the Texas attorney general in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit challenging the federal government’s failure to meet with its used fuel disposal obligations. Among its many requests for relief, the petition seeks disgorgement (i.e., release) and restitution (i.e., return) of the now approximately $38 billion in the Nuclear Waste Fund. NEI has opposed the disgorgement and restitution claims. While the court ordinarily would be expected to issue a decision 18-24 months from now, there is considerable uncertainty as to how the case will proceed. NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 23 Page 177 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) GOAL 4.0 Delivering the Nuclear Promise: Safety, Reliability and Economic Performance: Transform the nuclear industry and ensure its future viability and profitability by making efficiency improvements, monetizing the value of the plants to the grid, and strengthening the industry’s commitment to excellence in safety and reliability. DELIVERABLE 4.1 YEAR-END SUMMARY RESULTS With member companies and other industry organizations, work with federal, regional and state organizations to monetize the attributes of U.S. nuclear power plants and address the market distortions caused by outof-market revenues. Ensure FERC allows states flexibility to take steps to preserve existing nuclear plants. Department of Energy Secretary Perry’s initiation of a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) rulemaking to support baseload generation in organized markets set the stage for significantly improving the prospects for at-risk merchant nuclear generators. In close coordination with our member companies, NEI took full advantage of the opportunity to prompt FERC to direct market operators to value attributes such as resiliency, on-site fuel and diversity. Recognizing that member companies in different regulatory and business environments have expressed concerns regarding the scope of the proposed rule, NEI used the policy process to establish its position and develop a strategy to engage with FERC and other decision makers. • After the energy secretary took the extraordinary step of proposing a rule for FERC to consider, NEI extensively engaged with the Executive Committee, Governmental Affairs Advisory Committee (GAAC), Legal Advisory Committee (LAC) and Executive Advocacy Steering Committee (EASC) to obtain input and guidance on establishing NEI’s position. In addition to obtaining detailed guidance during the multiple joint GAAC, LAC, and EASC meetings and two Executive Committee calls that NEI held, NEI also received direct feedback from Executive Committee and Board members, as well as from numerous other member company representatives. • NEI developed detailed comments to FERC on the DOE proposal which several NEI member companies and Executive Committee members recognized as high quality. NEI’s comments urged FERC to immediately: (1) adopt a cost-of-service mechanism at least until other sustainable market structures are in place; (2) direct the RTOs to complete action to correct flaws in energy price formation rules; (3) initiate proceedings to ensure the market sustainably values resilience in the long term; and (4) establish a policy affirming state authority to maintain nuclear generation resources. NEI also used the increased focus on resilience to conduct more extensive outreach and education highlighting the important role nuclear generation plays in national security. Continued NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 24 Page 178 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Continued: Deliverable 4.1 • The proposed rule was preceded by DOE’s August 23 release of its study of evolving electricity markets. NEI provided extensive background information to DOE in an effort to help shape the report, which calls on FERC to complete reforms to price formation in organized electricity markets and to require that reliability services are compensated in the marketplace. FERC began looking at the price formation issue three years ago and has made slow progress. As FERC has ordered rather minor changes to price-setting rules, this recommendation bolsters calls to be more forward-leaning. • The DOE report specifically highlighted a proposal put forward by PJM in the spring that would enable nuclear plants to set the market price at certain times of the day, better recognizing the role that nuclear plants are playing in providing reliable generation. RESULTS DELIVERABLE 4.2 Ensure recognition of the value of avoided emissions of nuclear energy in state programs to achieve environmental goals. Implement a campaign that will either expand state renewable promotional programs to include nuclear energy or create parallel programs that will similarly value nuclear energy’s environmental benefits. YEAR-END SUMMARY NEI is continuing to strongly advocate in support of state decisions to preserve their nuclear plants, including in major legal battles before the courts. In addition, Connecticut passed legislation allowing Millstone to compete in a state procurement with other carbon-free generation sources. Other state-level legislative actions during the past several months have focused on Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Ohio. While none of these states has yet enacted policies to support the current fleet, the debate in several of them has started to pick up, with a considerable effort by our opponents. RESULTS • In two important precedent-setting cases on the ability of states to value the environmental attributes of nuclear generation, NEI filed amicus briefs in November before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, defending the New York and Illinois zero-emission credit (ZEC) programs. In July, district courts in New York and Illinois dismissed challenges to the ZEC program. On appeal, NEI’s briefs argue that initiatives by states to use nuclear generation’s zero-carbon attributes to meet their environmental goals represent sound public policy and are logical extensions of renewable energy credit programs. Absent NEI’s participation in these cases, details on the environmental benefits of nuclear generation would have gone underemphasized before the courts. • As noted in goal 2.1, after two years and two legislative sessions, the Connecticut Legislature passed and Governor Malloy signed S.B. 1501, a bill authorizing a zero-carbon procurement program that puts the zero-carbon emitting generation from Millstone Nuclear Station on an even playing field with other zero-carbon sources. NEI proudly and consistently delivered nuclear messaging to the governor and the legislature over the last two years and beyond through media, grassroots and stakeholder support. Continued NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 25 Page 179 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Continued: Deliverable 4.2 • NEI has engaged across the Ohio state government to support enactment of zero-emission nuclear credit legislation. Maria Korsnick testified at legislative hearings on the issue and NEI has convened meetings with the governor’s staff on the value of nuclear energy to Ohio. • NEI has worked in conjunction with our members to support legislative proposals in Pennsylvania and New Jersey once they are introduced. • NEI is supporting Georgia Power’s request to continue construction at Vogtle 3/4 at the Georgia Public Service Commission. NEI is participating in the proceeding as an intervenor, has submitted testimony and will provide an oral testimony at the hearing in December. RESULTS DELIVERABLE 4.3 YEAR-END SUMMARY RESULTS Enable cost-savings at operating plants by developing efficiency improvements, especially those with the potential for high-value, transformative impact on fleet operations and costs, in areas identified as cost drivers and institutionalize NEI efficiency bulletins as the means to convey these opportunities to industry. This deliverable was completed, with the publication of 22 new efficiency bulletins enabling more than $820 million in cost savings fleet wide. Bulletins issued in 2016 are providing significant savings as implementation experience grows. For example, in-processing standardization has led to over $500,000 direct savings per refueling outage. The 2016 cost of generation (reported in March 2017) was $33.93, 15.7 percent below the 2012 peak of $40.25 (in 2016 dollars). Further declines are expected when the 2017 costs are reported. • A culture change embracing continuing efficiency improvements is occurring at the plant sites, evidenced by the enthusiasm for additional high-value cost savings. • The 22 new efficiency bulletins (of 64 total) enabling $820 million (of $1.6 billion total) in fleet-wide savings included transforming plant maintenance and engineering organizations, value-based maintenance, standardized processes for training, key performance indicators, corrective action programs, and risk-informing treatment of components and systems. • High-value transformative enhancements continue to flow from previously issued bulletins for standard design process, risk-informed engineering and aligning maintenance with surveillance performance requirements for components and systems. • A group of senior DNP fleet coordinators will lead the effort to ensure that DNP provides sustainable and continuing value for the fleet. NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 26 Page 180 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) DELIVERABLE 4.4 Evaluate security measures and reduce the burden on plant operations while continuing to provide adequate defense against radiological sabotage or diversion of nuclear materials. YEAR-END SUMMARY A range of initiatives to improve regulatory policies and provide guidance to achieve better alignment between NRC requirements and the current threat environment are in progress with the NRC. RESULTS • Desired outcomes have been achieved on the following initiatives; however, commission disposition expected in 2018 is necessary to achieve desired results: ○○ Minimizing impact of changes to regulatory guides. ○○ Achieved alignment with NRC on force-on-force exercise inspection efficiency. ○○ Achieved alignment with NRC on crediting law enforcement. • NEI achieved alignment with NRC on compensatory measure timelines that will eliminate security officers on standby to compensate failed equipment. Endorsement and implementation will occur in 2018. • Established positive engagement with NRC on the security framework for new technology that is performance-capability based. • Significant savings were realized in 2017 from Delivering the Nuclear Promise bulletins issued at end of 2016 according to industry feedback: security equipment assessment, security shift brief, and turnover and protective strategy evaluation. DELIVERABLE 4.5 Support effective congressional oversight to reduce unnecessary regulatory requirements and right-size the NRC consistent with the Project Aim recommendations. YEAR-END SUMMARY During 2017 NRC costs and staff were reduced toward right-sizing the agency, its culture began to change, and regulatory burden was reduced while maintaining safety and productivity. RESULTS • Licensee fees were reduced by about $135 million fleet-wide since FY2014. NRC appropriations for FY2018 are expected to further reduce NRC user fees with a possible reduction of fees as a proportion of total appropriations (running about 88 percent). NRC staffing levels are below 3,300 for the first time since 2006 and are projected to be below 3,200 in 2018. • As a result of appropriations committee instructions to the NRC, a more risk-informed process in agency activities is evident by the approach to evaluations of Limiting Conditions for Operations (LCOs) and improving the realism of Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) information used by the NRC. The NRC’s strategic plan for FY2018-FY2022 provides a strong risk-informed focus on future NRC actions. Continued NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 27 Page 181 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Continued: Deliverable 4.5 • NEI established a targeted list of regulatory priorities with associated milestones and key messages to reduce unnecessary regulatory requirements and promote greater clarity, transparency and efficiency in agency actions. • There has been a significant reduction in the number of NRC rulemakings, resulting from efforts that called for improved NRC staff adherence to the backfit rule and early commission involvement in proposed rules. RESULTS DELIVERABLE 4.6 YEAR-END SUMMARY RESULTS DELIVERABLE 4.7 YEAR-END SUMMARY RESULTS Use risk insights to focus industry resources better on programs and processes that enhance safety focus and efficiency. Under Efficiency Bulletins 17-09 (license amendment requests) & 17-16 (alternate treatments), the industry is taking advantage of the NRC regulation 10 CFR 50.69, Risk-Informed Categorization and Treatment of Structures, Systems and Components, setting a process in motion at each site for significant cost savings and culture change in the coming years. Successful implementation of 50.69 will result in $1-7 million cost savings per unit per year. • Fifty sites are currently planning to submit 50.69 LARs to the NRC. Six LARs have already been accepted by the NRC for review. • To reduce the cost of developing LARs, many effective tools and processes were developed including templates, guidance, generic procedures, expert panel training material, change management plans, coordinated review of LARs prior to submittal and coordinated responses to NRC RAIs. • A framework was developed to take advantage of 50.69 increasing the value of several previously issued efficiency bulletins for the procurement of commercial parts, expanding value-based maintenance, eliminating monitoring and reporting requirements, enabling digital upgrades and remote monitoring, and increasing use of tool pouch maintenance. Communicate to industry and external stakeholders the value of the Delivering the Nuclear Promise (DNP) strategy to encourage participation and collaboration among member companies and stakeholders. During 2017, NEI maintained constant communications through various means to promote both the value and efficiency sides of the DNP initiative. This resulted in heightened awareness of the value of the DNP initiative and is leading to improved utilization of DNP products. • NEI highlighted the DOE grid study focusing on monetizing the attributes of nuclear generation and correcting market distortions with a press release, social media, one-pager and a press conference call. • Nine monthly email DNP updates (open rate >50 percent) were provided to communications professionals and DNP fleet coordinators for use in their communications programs Continued NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 28 Page 182 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Continued: Deliverable 4.7 • Summaries and articles on 21 new efficiency bulletins were published for use with internal and external audiences. RESULTS • Two DNP videos were created and distributed for NEI member use. • All DNP marketing materials were branded with a registered trademark. • NEI commenced work on a DNP retrospective and forward-looking whitepaper focusing on the quantifiable impact of the initiative on the recognition of the value of nuclear and in improving efficiency. GOAL 5.0 NEI is best-in-class among industry associations for value to its members, integrity, well- managed operations and sustainable DELIVERABLE 5.1 YEAR-END SUMMARY RESULTS DELIVERABLE 5.2 YEAR-END SUMMARY Implement the year-two initiatives in the five-year talent management strategy, including recruitment and retention strategies and conducting a self-assessment of NEI’s individual development program. NEI successfully implemented several talent management activities focused on retaining and recruiting top talent. • NEI performed a comprehensive effectiveness review in January and subsequently reorganized to increase the integration and alignment of key activities (governmental affairs, policy development and communications). As part of this reorganization, NEI revamped its leadership team and recruited stronger talent in some key staff roles. • A primary objective of the NEI’s talent management program is to develop high potential employees to ensure they can be retained. NEI successfully implemented a leadership development program in the latter part of 2016. Building on that, NEI has rolled out a management development program (as a precursor to its Leadership Development Program). • NEI revamped its training week to focus on elevating employees’ perspectives on how the industry fits into the broader strategic, political and business landscape as well as some division-specific skill sets. Implement the five-year strategy derived from 2017 long-term strategic planning efforts and address alternative models for funding revenue sources, budget and staffing. NEI developed the 2018 NEI business plan that will identify the resources required to implement the national nuclear energy strategy (NNES). Additionally, NEI is considering a long-term view of its financial situation, including anticipated reduction of member dues and methods for increasing non-dues revenue. Continued NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 29 Page 183 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Continued: Deliverable 5.2 • he reorganization mentioned above resulted in a staff downsizing T that reduced NEI staff by 13 percent and enabled NEI to maintain a flat member dues level in 2018. The actual cost savings from the reorganization was approximately $1.5 million. • In addition to the staff reorganization, NEI implemented a cost-cutting initiative to reduce 2017 expenses. This resulted in $1 million in costsavings. • NEI performed its biennial dues review (for all non-utility members) to ensure dues were commensurate with appropriate member dues tiers, as based on worldwide nuclear-related revenue. This review resulted in an anticipated increase of approximately $500,000 in 2018. • Given that NEI’s conference income is a notable source of non-dues revenues, NEI has modified its conference fee structure for both member and non-member attendees and exhibitors with anticipated future revenue of over $100,000 annually. • As NEI completed the development of the national nuclear energy strategy (NNES) as its strategic framework, it also has transitioned its resource planning to that framework. Final allocation of resources to the 2018 campaign plans of the NNES and core work of NEI will be completed by year-end. RESULTS DELIVERABLE 5.3 Implement IT systems changes that reflect critical lessons learned from the 2017 penetration test YEAR-END SUMMARY In 2017, the NEI IT department focused on security initiatives across the enterprise. The team has increased security measures on both its client and server architecture as more assets have moved to the cloud. The work in 2017 was successfully tested by a network perimeter edge assessment and a systems penetration test resulting in recommendations for modifications to NEI’s systems security posture. These recommendations were implemented. RESULTS • Penetration testing of the system is in process and is in its third phase and will be completed in December. An external security firm has conducted a perimeter assessment and has recommended some changes to firewall rule sets to comply with the latest security standards. • An internal third-party nuclear cybersecurity expert is reviewing the protocol and results of the tests. Results will be shared with NEI’s Audit Committee and Executive Committee in 2018. • During the 2017 computer refresh, new anti-malware, ransomware and security scanning tools were added to the standard computer load. • NEI has fully implemented a new tool used to proactively scan network servers and user laptops for possible security holes. • In the third and fourth quarters 2017, NEI has built out, secured and begun migrating key external website servers to the Windows Azure platform also loaded with new defense programs that were implemented in 2017. NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 30 Page 184 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) DELIVERABLE 5.4 Implement updates of NEI’s emergency response plan based on analysis done in 2016. Build scenarios into the 2017 industry drill to test the industry response framework based on cyber events that could render ineffective normal working conditions and communications channels to/from NEI members and key stakeholders. YEAR-END SUMMARY NEI’s objective is to make its emergency response plan more effective and efficient in addressing a plant emergency from an industry-wide perspective. Priorities include ensuring proper NEI staffing and understanding of roles given staffing changes/reductions, prompt and adequate notification from INPO, members and government partners of events, and distribution of information internally. RESULTS • A number of actions have been identified and are in progress or completed: ○○ Addressing long-term management of NEI’s emergency response center (staffing, facility, etc.). ○○ Strengthening relationships with government partners such as DHS, NRC and DOE. ○○ A table-top drill planned for the fall of 2017 was not conducted due to conflicting schedules. NEI will participate in a full industry drill that will be held in 2018. ○○ All new employees have been trained on NEI’s emergency response protocols. DELIVERABLE 5.5 YEAR-END SUMMARY RESULTS Fully implement the member outreach program, assess its effectiveness and make necessary corrections to ensure enterprise-wide involvement. NEI has increased its focus on member outreach, recruitment and support. Member recruitment efforts have resulted in 17 new members and $600,000 in increased revenue. • NEI’s member outreach program continues to optimize the member experience. Monthly interdivisional meetings are held to collect input on member feedback across the scope of NEI membership. This information sharing has led to early identification of issues that were addressed with the members. A notable success of this program has been a heightened awareness of the importance of customer service and member outreach. To date, this process has not fully collected utility member feedback. This will be a focus in 2018 to ensure the program is expanded to reflect the full membership. Additionally, more comprehensive methods for surfacing and addressing critical member feedback are still in progress. • NEI implemented a program for onboarding new CNOs to the Nuclear Strategic Issues Advisory Committee (NSIAC) to ensure broad understanding of NEI activities and focus. This is a pilot for all advisory committee (AC) members. A review of the effectiveness of this program will be performed. It is expected to be expanded to all ACs in 2018. NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 31 Page 185 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) DELIVERABLE 5.6 Expand the review of cumulative impact of NEI internal administrative requirements, and identify operational areas where cost efficiencies may be found (e.g., a comprehensive lease audit, audit of high-dollar vendors). YEAR-END SUMMARY A review of nearly every item in NEI’s operating budget was conducted with a “no cut is too small” perspective. Many services were dropped, vendors replaced or contracts favorably re-negotiated. RESULTS • NEI has renegotiated its contract with IST Services, which provides contract staff for reception, copy center and administrative services. The result will be increased services and a savings of around $500,000 over the next three years. • Due to the stability and resilience of the current IT assets, $85,000 was saved in 2017 by foregoing its one-third replacement of the staff laptops this year. • NEI saved $120,000 by terminating or renegotiating publications and software contracts. • To help manage health care costs, NEI established a spousal surcharge for its plans and encouraged greater participation for employees in the NEI high deductible health care plan. It is anticipated that these changes may save NEI $75,000 annually and help offset rising health care costs. • In 2017, NEI established a health retirement account (HRA) program to replace a self-administered program, which will reduce administrative costs by $35,000 annually. • NEI has negotiated a sublease with a member company for offices on the 10th floor left vacant as a result of the reorganization. This sublease should allow NEI to recover $75,000 in costs annually over the next two years. • Other operating expense savings include office, mail and shipping, catering services, and HRIS services saving approximately $35,000 annually. DELIVERABLE 5.7 Revise and increase the use of standard contracts and agreement templates to ensure best practices and increase operational efficiencies. YEAR-END SUMMARY NEI has updated standard contracts and agreements to incorporate current best practices. The revisions reduce NEI’s risk when entering into commercial arrangements. Updating and expanding the use of standard documents should increase operational efficiency, in addition to providing other protections from broader use of best practices. RESULTS • NEI has updated standard professional services agreements, intellectual property license agreements, hotel and conference contracts, and purchase order terms. These contracts and agreements now reflect current best practices and will be used going forward. • Updating and increasing the use of NEI’s standard hotel and conference contract represents significant progress and will put the conference team in a better position to negotiate as it plans future NEI conferences. • NEI’s standard purchase order terms were improved to protect NEI when purchasing goods and services. NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 32 Page 186 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) DELIVERABLE 5.8 YEAR-END SUMMARY RESULTS Audit NEI’s intellectual property and associated practices to ensure they are consistent with best practices for protecting the organization’s copyrights and trademarks. Modify and implement any necessary organizational practices and procedures. NEI has taken significant steps this year to improve our management of intellectual property by educating the staff and conducting an intellectual property audit. The audit led NEI to develop a formal strategy for continued management and periodic assessment of our assets. • NEI has completed an intellectual property audit, which included creating a complete catalogue of NEI’s intellectual property assets. • NEI has carried out initial intellectual property training for the staff, revised trademark usage guidelines and ensured NEI’s image database is protected. • NEI has updated the NEI and Nuclear Matters websites to comply with our trademark/copyright compliance guidelines and is adding new “terms of use” language. All of these actions help to proceduralize how NEI protects its intellectual property assets and meet the best-in-class standard. • As discussed in deliverable 5.7, NEI also has established standard intellectual property agreements. • Next steps include incorporating further staff training into the education and development schedule for 2018. NEI 2017 Annual Business Plan: End-of-Year Report 33 Page 187 of 408 NEI_2017_End-of-year_Report_vsFinal.pdf for Printed Item: 1203 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 1201 F Street, NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 nei.org Page 188 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5416 From: Nuclear Energy Overview To: Kent, Thomas J. Cc: Bcc: Subject: Nuclear Energy Overview - Jan. 18, 2018 Date: Fri Jan 19 2018 07:35:43 CST Attachments: **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Nuclear Energy Overview January 18, 2018 This week's top story — Senator Raises Flag Over Increased Competition in Nuclear Technology Jan. 18, 2018—Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) shared her concerns about America's shrinking technological lead in commercial nuclear energy during a committee hearing this week on global energy. The senator aired her concerns about the growing commercial nuclear expertise of global competitors during a hearing of the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, which she chairs. Other Stories this week — NEI Exec Says America's Nuclear Industry at a Crossroads You can view Overview by clicking here. _____ Nuclear Energy Overview's daily news service provides the latest information on industry topics, legistation and more. For news as it happens, bookmark the NEO page and check frequently for new content. Or click for a roll-up of this week's stories in PDF format. Nuclear Energy Institute _____ Your questions, comments, suggestions or any additions to the mailing list are welcome. We can be reached at overview@nei.org. We look forward to hearing from you. For more information, visit www.nei.org. Unsubscribe from these messages. twitter facebook You Tube RSS Flickr Blogger Page 189 of 408 This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Page 190 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.10120 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. To: McClure, John C. Cc: Bcc: Subject: NEI Impact Study Date: Thu Jan 18 2018 17:22:41 CST Attachments: Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx I have incorporated the subject matter expert comments into this latest version, highlighted them, and sent it to NEI for putting into a final report. It’s a pretty easy read. Would you like to make sure you are good with what we have said and what the report says? Page 191 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.10120-000001 Owner: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Filename: Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx Last Modified: Thu Jan 18 17:22:41 CST 2018 Page 192 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1206 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station An Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute January, 2018 1 Page 193 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1206 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Table of Contents 2 Page 194 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1206 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Executive Summary The Cooper Nuclear Station (Cooper), located along the Missouri River in the southeast corner of Nebraska, has long been a vital part of the region’s energy portfolio, providing reliable electricity since it began operating in 1974. In addition to this reliable, carbonfree electricity, the plant supports hundreds of direct jobs. Employee involvement in their community also makes Cooper a significant social and economic contributor to Nebraska. Cooper is Nebraska’s largest single source of carbon-free electricity. To quantify the economic impacts of this facility in Nebraska, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) conducted an independent analysis. Based on data provided by Nebraska Public Power District (Cooper’s operator) on employment and operating expenditures, NEI conducted the analysis using the PI+ model provided by Regional Economic Models, Inc. (REMI), a nationally recognized model. Key Findings Cooper’s operations provide: Employment benefits Cooper Nuclear Station supports hundreds of jobs in the five regional counties surrounding the plant (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe, and Richardson) and the rest of Nebraska through its operations. NEI estimates that the total number of jobs supported by Cooper annually is over 1000 jobs. That includes over 680 jobs in the five counties surrounding the plant and 320 jobs in the rest of Nebraska. These employment numbers include the number of direct and additional jobs created as a result of the expenditures from Cooper operations. While there are certainly economic benefits to other states, particularly nearby Missouri and Iowa, this study focused only on the state of Nebraska. Economic stimulus Cooper produces significant economic benefits for Nebraska through its plant operations. NEI’s analysis finds that Cooper generates over $112 million in annual economic output (value-added or gross regional product), which includes over $66 million for the five counties surrounding the plant and more than $46 million for the rest of Nebraska. 2018 economic benefits for the Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe, and Richardson counties surrounding the Cooper Nuclear Station include:  $66 million economic output from plant operations  $63 million increase in gross domestic product  $70 million in disposable personal income. 2018 economic benefits for the rest of Nebraska include: 3 Page 195 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1206 ( Attachment 1 of 1)    $46 million economic output from plant operations $26 million increase in gross domestic product $32 million in disposable personal income. Long-term economic stimulus This study finds that between 2018 and 2034 (60-year license expiration date), Cooper’s operations will generate over $1.9 billion in economic output to Nebraska, including $1.2 billion to the five counties surrounding the plant and additional $675 million in the rest of Nebraska. Clean electricity for Nebraska Cooper’s operations generate carbon-free clean electricity. Cooper prevents the release of more than 6.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually1, the same amount released by approximately 1.4 million cars every year2. For perspective, there are estimated 733,000 passenger cars in Nebraska3. Reliability benefits Cooper provides 820 megawatts of around-the-clock electricity through Nebraska Public Power District to the Southwest Power Pool, powering homes and businesses. During the past five years, the station has operated at more than 93 percent of capacity4, on par with the industry average and significantly higher than other forms of electricity generation. This reliable production helps offset potential price volatility of other energy sources (e.g. natural gas) and the intermittency of renewable electricity sources. Emissions prevented are calculated using the weighted average CO2 emissions rate (2095 lbs/MWh) for the Midwest Reliability Organization region, provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Nebraska Public Power District reported electricity generation of 6.9 million MWh in 2017. 2 Calculated using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator. https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator 3 Retrieved using January 2017 release of the Highway Statistics from the U.S. Department of Transportaiton Federal Highway Administration. 4 Retrieved using ABB Velocity Suite, which sourced the data from U.S. Energy Information Administration 1 4 Page 196 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1206 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Historical Background Cooper Nuclear Station is located along the Missouri River in the southeast corner of Nebraska. It consists of one boiling water reactor (BWR) that produces 820 megawatts (MW) of carbon-free baseload power. Cooper Nuclear Station is owned and operated by Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) and supplies electric grid through the Southwest Power Pool, a regional transmission organization. Additional nuclear expertise is provided through a services agreement with Entergy Nuclear Nebraska. Cooper is named after Humboldt, Nebraska natives Guy Cooper, Sr., and Guy Cooper, Jr., in recognition of their contribution to public power in Nebraska. Cooper began commercial operation in 1974 under an initial 40-year license, which was renewed in 2010 for additional 20-years. Its current license expiration is 2034. Reliable electricity generation Cooper operated at a capacity factor of over 93 percent over the last five years [source #4]. Capacity factor, a measure of electricity production efficiency, is the ratio of actual electricity generated to the maximum possible electric generation during the year. As the sole nuclear power plant in Nebraska, Cooper generated more than 6.9 million megawatt-hours in 20175, a new record for the plant. This results in Cooper providing power to over 450,000 Nebraskans during a non-refueling outage year, like 2017. Refueling outages occur every 24 months, with the next one scheduled for fall 2018. Thousands of local jobs Cooper employs approximately 680 people, with more than 550 of them living in Nebraska.6 The annual payroll and benefits are more than $76 million for permanent employees and contractors, including over $60 million in the five counties surrounding the plant and more than $2.8 million in the rest of Nebraska. Most jobs at nuclear power plants require technical training and are typically among the highest-paying jobs in the area. Nationwide, nuclear energy jobs pay 36 percent more than average salaries in a plant’s local area.7 Safe and clean for the environment Generating clean energy is an important step in reducing the effects of climate change and vital to protecting the environment for current and future generations. Nuclear energy facilities generate large amount of electricity without emitting greenhouse gases. State and federal policymakers recognize nuclear energy as an essential source of safe, reliable electricity that meets both environmental needs and demand for electricity. Cooper, like all nuclear power plants, produces baseload power that is carbon-free. Cooper avoided the emission of over 6.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually [source 1], the same amount released by approximately 1.4 million cars every year Nebraska Public Power District reported the 2017 electricity generation to U.S. Energy Information Administration Form EIA-923. 6 Nebraska Public Power District provided 2016 actual employment numbers. 7 “Nuclear Energy’s Economic Benefits – Current and Future.” Nuclear Energy Institute, 2014. 5 5 Page 197 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1206 ( Attachment 1 of 1) [source 2]. For perspective, there are estimated 733,000 passenger cars in Nebraska [source 3]. Cooper also prevented the release of other air pollutants - over 7,900 short tons of sulfur dioxide8 and more than 5,590 short tons of nitrogen oxide9 - which are precursors to acid rain and urban smog. Emissions prevented are calculated using the weighted average sulfur dioxide emissions rate (2.2994 lbs/MWh) for the Midwest Reliability Organization region, provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 9 Emissions prevented are calculated using the weighted average nitrogen oxide emissions rate (1.6203 lbs/MWh) for the Midwest Reliability Organization region, provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 8 6 Page 198 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1206 ( Attachment 1 of 1) State and Regional Benefits NEI used the REMI PI+ model (2.1.5) to analyze economic and expenditure data provided by NPPD to develop estimates of its economic benefits from Cooper Nuclear Station’s operations. More information on REMI can be found on [page for REMI section]. The economic impacts of Cooper discussed in this section consist of the following variables that are used to analyze these impacts: Output Output, in this context, refers to the economic activity generated by Cooper Nuclear Station. The direct output is the economic activity produced by the facility. The secondary output is the value of the economic activity generated in other industries because of Cooper, as well as how people employed at the facility influence the demand for goods and services within the region. Employment The direct employment is the number of jobs at Cooper. Secondary employment is jobs in other industries as a result of Cooper’s operations. Gross state product Cooper contributes to Nebraska’s gross state product, which the REMI model calculates as value of goods and services produced by labor and property – minus intermediate goods. For a nuclear plant, electricity is the final good. The intermediate goods are the components purchased to make that electricity. Disposable personal income Cooper contributes a significant sum to Nebraska’s disposable personal income, which is one of the indicators used by economists to monitor the state of economy. Disposable personal income identifies the available household money for spending and saving after accounting for the income taxes. State and Regional economic benefits The reliable availability of Cooper’s power is critical to such things as national security and regional grid stability. Commercial businesses, industries, and manufacturing facilities which require power 24 hours a day, seven days a week also benefit from Cooper’s constant supply of electricity. Cooper’s total 2018 annual economic output impact on Nebraska is estimated to be over $112 million in direct and secondary impact, including over $66 million to the five regional counties surrounding the plant (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe, and Richardson) and more than $46 million for the rest of Nebraska. 7 Page 199 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1206 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Cooper contributes more than $89 million to Nebraska’s gross state product in 2018, including $63 million to the five regional counties and over $25 million to the rest of Nebraska. Cooper also contributes approximately $102 million to Nebraska’s disposable personal income in 2018, including $70 million to the five regional counties and $32 million to the rest of Nebraska. Table 1 summarizes the plant’s effects on the five regional counties and the rest of Nebraska’s economies, the gross state product, and disposable personal income in 2018 from operations. Cooper’s operations have substantial economic impact on other industries. Cooper’s output also stimulates the state’s and region’s labor income and employment. The plant employs approximately 528 people in permanent and contracting jobs in the five regional counties and 23 people in the rest of Nebraska10. These jobs stimulate over 450 additional jobs in the five regional counties and the rest of Nebraska. Table 2 details the quantity and types of jobs that Cooper supports. Plant workers are included in the table’s utility occupation categories. Long-term economic benefits This study finds that between 2018 and 2034 (the license expiration date), Cooper’s operations will generate over $1.9 billion in economic output to Nebraska, including $1.2 billion to the five counties surrounding the plant and additional $675 million in the rest of Nebraska. Table 1 Cooper’s Impact on the Five Regional Counties Surrounding the Plant and Rest of Nebraska (2016 dollars, in millions) Description Five regional counties surrounding the plant (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe, and Richardson) - Output Direct and Secondary Economic Output11 2018 2018 to 2034 (license expiration) $66 - Gross State Product $63 - Disposable Personal Income $70 $1,239 NPPD provided the 2016 actual employment numbers. Cooper also hires approximately 130 people across Iowa, Missouri, and elsewhere; however, those numbers were not utilized for the purpose of this Nebraska-based study. 11 Direct output was calculated based on a four-year average between 2013 and 2016, in 2016 dollars. 10 8 Page 200 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1206 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Rest of Nebraska - Output $46 - Gross State Product $25 - Disposable Personal Income $32 $675 Table 2 Job Impacts from Cooper Operations Category Utilities12 Retail Trade Other Services, except Public Administration Health Care and Social Assistance Accommodation and Food Services Finance and Insurance Construction Wholesale Trade Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation Manufacturing Real Estate and Rental and Leasing Transportation and Warehousing Administrative and Waste Management Services Other Industries TOTAL Five Regional Counties (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe, and Richardson) 528 81 19 Rest of Nebraska 23 64 35 551 145 54 16 14 9 6 2 1 57 26 16 10 11 19 73 40 25 16 13 20 1 1 1 7 6 9 8 7 10 1 1 6 18 7 18 1 681 Total 12 320 13 1001 Utilities sector includes direct employment at Cooper Nuclear Station in Nebraska and secondary employment from the rest of Nebraska to support the operations. 12 9 Page 201 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1206 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Community Leadership and Environmental Protection In addition to the economic benefits Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) contributes to the region in the forms of jobs, income, and economic output, NPPD and its employees plan a major role in the health and welfare of the community. NPPD has supported local community organizations through financial support and volunteerism. Community Engagement Community Leadership Cooper employees are active members of their communities. Cooper’s employees serve on city councils, coach athletic teams, and own local businesses. Cooper has also supported local events, such as the City of Auburn’s annual Spookfest during Halloween, which brings businesses together to hand-out candy to children dressed up for trick-or-treating. Cooper employees also volunteer in community parades, local chamber of commerce chili cook-offs, holiday angel tree gift donations, and school science fairs. School Programs Cooper Nuclear Station is directly involved with the Energy Generation Operations Program at the Southeast Community College (SECC) in Milford, Neb. The program began in 2008 as a way to train future operators, and has emerged into a successful program that gives students hands-on operations training at the plant site. The students are prepared for employment at a nuclear power plant during the two-year program. NPPD has continuously provided opportunities to the students through tours, job shadowing experiences, and recruitment upon graduation. NPPD’s Energy Education team and communication professionals bring presentations to schools and local civic groups to educate them about the benefits of nuclear power and Cooper’s support for the community. In addition to SECC, NPPD’s energy educators conducted workshops for teachers at Peru State College. Particularly in 2017, One specific example in 2017 was placing NPPD’s also set up its mobile STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) lab at Johnson High School for two weeks. Students and teachers, alike, take time to explore the lab, create, engineer and experience job-related tasks so as to understand the importance and excitement of a career in the energy industry. The mobile STEM lab is complemented by online curriculum models, in-class presentations, robotic interactions with students, and a statewide robotics program. At least 400 middle and high school students in five schools from around Cooper participated in one or more of Cooper’s energy education activities in 2017. Site Tours NPPD encourages tours of its facilities for community leaders, state dignitaries, civic associations, and school groups. 10 Page 202 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1206 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Cooper employees host the Nebraska LEAD Program of the Nebraska Agriculture Leadership Council tours Cooper annually as part of the program’s educational site visits. Cooper has hosted representatives from Japan, as well as the USS Nebraska (SSBN-739), a nuclear-powered, Ohio-class submarine. Cooper also continuously hosts tours for the Nebraska National Guard, local law enforcement, state dignitaries, international visitors, and local schools and colleges. NPPD conducts 20 tours of the Cooper Nuclear Station on average every year. Plant Neighbor Survey Recent survey of the Cooper Nuclear Station showed exceptional support from the local residents, compared to the benchmarks from other nuclear power plants.13 The results are comparable to the same survey conducted in 2011. Ninety-two percent of Cooper’s neighbors have a favorable impression of the plant and its recent operations; 71 percent have a very favorable impression. In addition, 88 percent of Cooper’s neighbors favor nuclear energy. Respondents’ indicated their support for Cooper is based on perceptions of the plant’s safe operations and their favorable view of NPPD regarding economic impact and jobs, safety, community outreach and protecting the environment. The survey also found:  94 percent of respondents are confident in NPPD’s ability to operate a nuclear power plant safely;  93 percent of Cooper’s neighbors believe nuclear energy will be important to meeting the nation’s electricity needs;  93 percent said NPPD is doing a good job of protecting the environment;  84 percent feel somewhat well informed about nuclear energy; and  72 percent believe people living near a nuclear plant are unlikely to be exposed to harmful levels of radiation. Environmental Stewardship and Public Safety There have been no adverse environmental effects ever recorded at Cooper Nuclear Station. The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program at Cooper monitors radiation in ambient air, drinking water, river water, farm animal milk samples, soil, sediment, river fish, and local vegetation. Samples are analyzed by independent vendor and the results are provided to public and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which have never exceeded regulatory limits. The survey was conducted by Bisconti Research, Inc. and Quest Global Research in the fall of 2017. Approximately 250 people living within 10 miles of Cooper Nuclear Station were surveyed. The purpose of the survey was to measure the opinions of local residents about the plant as a neighbor, employer, and economic engine. 13 11 Page 203 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1206 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Fire Brigade and Emergency Medical Technicians Cooper employs nearly 100 individuals who serve as a member of the on-site fire brigade or who are certified as emergency medical technicians (EMTs). Additionally, all Cooper employees are trained to perform first responder duties in the event of an emergency. NPPD’s Hazardous Material Emergency Response Plan also identifies specifically trained individuals and teams to respond to particular events (such as spills, fires, or medical emergencies), if required. This dedication to safety expands beyond Cooper. Members of fire brigade also support their local fire departments, and Cooper’s EMTs also serve on area response crews. They also participate in and lead training courses for area fire departments and rescue squads. Emergency Preparedness Plan NPPD’s Cooper operations always prioritize safety. NPPD partners with the States of Nebraska and Missouri to ensure the public safety is always top of mind. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission carefully regulates and tests the validity of Cooper’s Emergency Preparedness Plan, designed to protect public health and safety in the unlikely event of an incident. High training standards and well-qualified staff demonstrate NPPD’s commitment to ensure that the physical environment is safe for all residents. Cooper’s tests this plan multiple times throughout the year. Exercises and drills are conducted both onsite and in partnership with the Nebraska Emergency Management Agency and the State of Missouri Emergency Management Agency, as well as county, state and local law enforcement, and regulatory entities such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Cooper provides both emergency information and an in-home radio alert system to residents living within a 10-mile radius of the plant. As a statewide utility, NPPD uses Cooper’s emergency response plan as a reference for similar crisis preparations, including its cyber security response plan, emergency restoration exercises, and its participation in the national Grid Ex exercise. Personnel qualifications Cooper’s Fitness for Duty Program ensures employees are qualified to access the site. Employees are hired after a stringent background check and drug screening. NPPD conducts random daily drug tests to measure and monitor employee performance. Cooper is also home to Cooper Nuclear Station Learning Center which provides comprehensive training for employees on a variety of industry and operational programs. A specially-designed simulator of the power plant’s control room assists in training NPPD personnel to operate the plant in both normal and emergency conditions. 12 Page 204 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1206 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Industry Performance and Regulatory Standing Cooper Nuclear Station is a member of the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) and continues to benefit from the organization’s evaluation and benchmarking processes. The mission of INPO is promote the highest level of safety and reliability – to promote excellence – in the performance of commercial, nuclear power plants. in 2016 for achieving a high-level of performance excellence since 1991. Cooper was also recognized as a top-performing plant. Cooper has continues to perform in the best category of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Reactor Oversight Process Action Matrix. 13 Page 205 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1206 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Economic Impact Analysis Methodology This analysis uses the REMI PI+ version 2.1.5 model to estimate the economic and fiscal impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station. Regional Economic Models Inc. Regional Economic Models Inc. (REMI), is a modeling firm is a modeling firm specializing in services related to economic impacts and policy analysis, headquartered in Amherst, Massachusetts. It provides software, support services, and issue-based expertise and consulting in almost every state, the District of Columbia, and other countries in North America, Europe, Latin America, the Middle East and Asia. The REMI model has two main purposes: forecasting and analysis of alternatives. All models have a “baseline” forecast of the future of a regional economy at the county level. Using “policy variables,” in REMI terminology, provides scenarios based on different situations. The ability to model policy variables makes it a powerful tool for conveying the economic “story” behind policy. The model translates various considerations into understandable concepts like GDP and jobs. REMI relies on data from public sources, including the Bureau of Economic Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Energy Information Administration and the Census Bureau. Forecasts for future macroeconomic conditions in REMI come from a combination of resources, which serve as the main framework for the software model needed to perform simulations. Policy Insight Plus REMI’s Policy Insight Plus (PI+) is a computerized, multiregional, dynamic model of the states or other subnational units of the United States economy. PI+ relies on four quantitative methodologies to guide its approach to economic modeling: 1) Input/output tabulation (IO)—IO models, sometimes called “social accounting matrices” (SAM), quantify the interrelation of industries and households in a computational sense. It models the flow of goods between firms in supply chains, wages paid to households, and final consumption by households, governments and the international market. These channels create the “multiplier” effect of $1 going further than when accounting for its echoing. 2) Computable general equilibrium (CGE)—CGE modeling adds market concepts to the IO structure. This includes how IO structures evolve over time and how they respond to alternative policies. CGE incorporates concepts on markets for labor, housing, consumer goods, imports and the importance of competitiveness to fostering economic growth over time. Changing one of these will influence the others—for instance, a new knife factory would improve the labor market and then bring it to a head by increasing migration into the area, driving housing and rent prices higher, and inducing the market to create a new subdivision to return to “market clearing” conditions. 14 Page 206 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1206 ( Attachment 1 of 1) 3) Econometrics—REMI uses statistical parameters and historical data to populate the numbers inside the IO and CGE portions. The estimation of the different parameters, elasticity terms and figures gives the strength of various responses. It also gives the “time-lags” from the beginning of a policy to the point where markets have had a chance to clear. 4) New economic geography—Economic geography provides REMI a sense of economies of scale and agglomeration. This is the quantification of the strength of clusters in an area and their influence on productivity. One example would include the technology and research industries in Seattle. The labor in the area specializes to serve firms like Amazon and Microsoft and, thus, their long-term productivity grows more quickly than that of smaller regions with no proclivity towards software development (such as Helena, Montana). The same is true on the manufacturing side with physical inputs, such as with the supply chain for Boeing and Paccar in Washington in the production of transportation equipment. Final assembly will have a close relationship and a high degree of proximity to its suppliers of parts, repairs, transportation and other professional services, which show up in clusters in the state. 15 Page 207 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1206 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Conclusion Economic and Employment Impacts NEI’s analysis finds that Cooper generates more than $112 million in annual economic output in Nebraska through its continued operations. This includes over $66 million for the five regional counties surrounding the station (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe, and Richardson) and more than $46 million for the rest of Nebraska. NEI’s analysis also finds that Cooper supports more than 1,000 jobs annually, which includes 680 jobs in the five regional counties and more 320 jobs in the rest of Nebraska from continued operations. Further Benefits of Cooper The station’s economic benefits – through wages and purchases of supplies and services – are considerable. In addition, plant employees further stimulate the local economy by purchasing goods and services from businesses around the area, supporting many small businesses in Nebraska. The facility generated 6.9 megawatt-hours of carbon-free electricity in 2017, enough to serve the yearly needs for hundreds of thousands of homes, while also addressing climate change producing carbon-free power. The Cooper Nuclear Station is a leader economically, fiscally, environmentally and socially within Nebraska. 16 Page 208 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.10110 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. To: McClure, John C. ; Becker, Mark C. ; Margheim, Scott A. ; Sanne, Brenda M. ; Gentert, Brianna P. Cc: Bcc: Subject: I am home again Date: Thu Jan 18 2018 15:42:22 CST Attachments: FYI - I returned from my medical appointments this afternoon and am editing the NEI Economic Impact Study report at home. If you need anything, I am available on phone or email. Page 209 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5390 From: Bill Pitesa To: Cc: Bcc: Subject: RE: NSIAC Steering Group: January 19 Conference Call Date: Thu Jan 18 2018 07:59:02 CST Attachments: NSIAC DNP Jan 19.pptx **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ I’m changing the access code for the NSIAC call tomorrow. Since the standard access code is well known, I’m concerned that individuals outside of the NSIAC steering committee may plan to participate. I’d ask that you not delegate this meeting as we will also be discussing recent NEI membership changes. The new dial-in is: Telecom (888) 850-4523 Passcode 120654# Thanks, Bill From: Bill Pitesa Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2018 4:54 PM Subject: NSIAC Steering Group: January 19 Conference Call January 16, 2018 TO: Nuclear Strategic Issues Advisory Committee Steering Group SUBJECT: January 19 Conference Call NEI will conduct a conference call with the NSIAC Steering Group this Friday, January 19, at noon Page 210 of 408 Eastern. The phone number is (800)-496-4518, Pass code 121214#. The agenda for the call is provided below and read-ahead materials are attached. Welcome We will debrief on any significant interactions with Commissioners or NRC senior management. Bill Pitesa Delivering the Nuclear Promise Report on DNP Industry Coordinating Group initial actions including coordination of improvement opportunities, plans to sunset the DNP efficiency teams and transfer DNP responsibilities to existing industry peer groups, and approach to six “special focus” areas that appear to have potential for transformative efficiencies. Desired Outcome: Steering Group awareness. Joe Pollock FLEX equipment data collection The FLEX equipment failure information being voluntarily provided by the industry has not been sufficient to accurately estimate FLEX equipment failure rates. This information is needed to support regulatory applications where credit for FLEX equipment is being sought. The NRC is seeking access to the data to help risk informed decision making for applications as well. Desired Outcome: Reinforce the need for utilities to continue to report FLEX equipment failures to the EPRI database, and obtain feedback from NSIACSG regarding NRC access to the data. Greg Krueger FERC Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) – Cyber Security Incident Reporting Provide an overview of the recently published NOPR and the actions planned by the industry. Desired Outcome: Steering Group awareness and feedback. Chris Earls Innovation and Transformation at the NRC Review NRC initiative to update the regulatory framework to promote new and innovative technologies. Desired Outcome: Steering Group awareness Bill Pitesa Update on Key Events Page 211 of 408 We will provide an update on major decisions or events that have transpired since our last meeting Desired Outcome: Steering Group awareness. Bill Pitesa Other Topics Adjourn Sincerely, Bill Pitesa Chief Nuclear Officer Nuclear Energy Institute 1201 F Street NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 www.nei.org P: 202.739.8081 C: 704.989.0943 E: wp@nei.org This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 212 of 408 Page 213 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5390-000001 Owner: Bill Pitesa Filename: NSIAC DNP Jan 19.pptx Last Modified: Thu Jan 18 07:59:02 CST 2018 Page 214 of 408 NSIAC DNP Jan 19.pptx for Printed Item: 1209 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Joe Pollack Steve Kraft Ben Youman January 19, 2018 DNP INDUSTRY COORDINATING GROUP UPDATE Desired Outcome: NSIAC-SG awareness with, and feedback on, DNP go-forward strategy from newly formed industry coordinating group and focus areas. Page 215 of 408 NSIAC DNP Jan 19.pptx for Printed Item: 1209 ( Attachment 1 of 1) DNP Industry Coordinating Group (DNP-ICG): Mission • Drive next round of impactful and transformative industry efficiency improvements • Accelerate industry expert teams development and accountability of efficiency initiatives to increase the enduring value of nuclear power • Assist the Nuclear Strategic Issues Advisory Committee Steering Group (NSIAC-SG) in its executive oversight role of DNP development and implementation Page 216 of 408 NSIAC DNP Jan 19.pptx for Printed Item: 1209 ( Attachment 1 of 1) DNP-ICG: Recent Actions • DNP-ICG defined the next phase of DNP protocols and processes for assessing industry DNP initiatives (Efficiency Opportunities and Efficiency Bulletins) o Goal remains 5-7 transformative efficiency bulletins per year (~$500K savings/site or a compelling reason for NSIAC sponsorship and approval) • In-flight DNP initiative review o o o None ready for immediate consideration (~20 active) Recommend new process, reviews and categorizations will apply to all going forward Additional efficiencies can be drawn from the original Improvement Opportunities •Existing DNP Efficiency Teams will be “sunset” o o o DNP responsibilities will be transferred to existing industry expert teams Communication will be sent to industry teams’ leads/sponsors (Target: Jan 31) DNP-ICG will engage with existing expert teams to assure continued efficiency development, reviews and approvals Page 217 of 408 NSIAC DNP Jan 19.pptx for Printed Item: 1209 ( Attachment 1 of 1) DNP-ICG: Focus Areas and Next Actions • Identified six focus areas with potential for transformative efficiency improvements based on existing Improvement Opportunities and DNP-ICG industry experience: o o o Chemistry EP RP o o o Security Training Remote Monitoring • Each focus area will be part of existing industry expert team or a new limitedterm task force to finalize development o Sponsors of expert teams will be contacted by DNP-ICG sponsor to assure alignment (Target: Jan. 31) • DNP-ICG will embed representatives in existing industry expert teams that align with the six focus areas to ensure development and assessment of new DNP Initiatives for NSIAC review Page 218 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5377 From: tealey@entergy.com on behalf of Bakken III, Christopher To: Bakken III, Christopher ; Costanzo, Christopher Robert ; Jury, Keith ; Dent Jr., John A. ; PROCTOR, BRUCE N ; Moody, Carol HR-Nuclear Cc: Bcc: Subject: NEI Discussion - 5:00 PM CT / 6:00 PM ET Date: Thu Jan 18 2018 06:45:00 CST Attachments: StartTime: Wed Jan 17 17:00:00 Central Standard Time 2018 EndTime: Wed Jan 17 17:30:00 Central Standard Time 2018 Location: Dial In: Internal - 8-576-7721 / External - 504-576-7721,,,3045# Recurring: No ShowReminder: No Accepted: No **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. ________________________________ Page 219 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.34598 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. To: Dentlinger, Courtney A. Cc: Bcc: Subject: RE: NEI membership news Date: Wed Jan 17 2018 14:45:25 CST Attachments: image001.jpg Yes. It will be interesting as it could affect our membership dues and the services NEI provides. In turn, NEI did the econ survey I am still trying to finalize. :-/ From: Dentlinger, Courtney A. Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 2:42 PM To: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Subject: RE: NEI membership news Thanks for sharing this, Jeanne. From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 9:12 AM To: Higgins, Shirley A. ; Dentlinger, Courtney A. Subject: FW: NEI membership news FYI From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 9:11 AM To: Corporate Communications Subject: FW: NEI membership news NUCLEAR GROUP LOSES TWO UTILITIES: The nuclear power industry's central lobbying outfit in D. C. is losing two of its utility member companies, NextEra and Entergy. Nuclear Energy Institute CEO Maria Korsnick said the two companies "made the business decision not to renew" their memberships with the trade association. NextEra and Entergy operate more than a dozen reactors, and both had seats on NEI's board of directors. The companies declined to comment. "We are disappointed by the decision but remain committed to our role as the voice of the nuclear industry representing the vast majority of the U.S. nuclear power generators on regulatory and policy issues," Korsnick said in a Page 220 of 408 statement to ME. NEI board chairman Don Brandt insists the group's work to advance the industry's policy interests "has never been more important." It's been a tough 18-months for NEI. The group has parted ways with three senior executives since the summer of 2016, and conducted a restructuring a year ago that cut about 15 staff - moves that reflect some of the industry's struggles From: Pope, Patrick L. Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2018 8:37 PM To: EPC List; Kimball, David S. Subject: FW: NEI membership news FYI. Pat (402) 469-4436 – cell Safety & Security – See something? SAY something! From: KORSNICK, Maria [mailto:mgk@nei.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2018 5:36 PM Cc: GRP. ELT Subject: NEI membership news **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ To: NEI Board of Directors This is to inform you that NextEra and Entergy have made the business decision not to renew NEI membership for the 2018 calendar year. I am attaching the letter that Don Brandt, NEI Chairman, sent to Executive Committee members informing them of these decisions. We are disappointed by the departures but remain committed to our role as the voice of the nuclear industry, representing the vast majority of the U.S. nuclear power generators on regulatory and policy issues. We remain dedicated to our mission and to the four objectives in the National Nuclear Energy Strategy: preserve, sustain, innovate and thrive. Page 221 of 408 NEI’s Executive Committee is considering how we address any non-member use of our products. Once we finalize our recommendation, we will better understand the impact. I will keep you informed as this situation evolves. This is a time for us to pull together and focus on the important work we do to support the industry. We owe that to all of our members. I appreciate the challenge this is for all of us, and thank you for your understanding. Maria MARIA KORSNICK President and Chief Executive Officer 1201 F Street NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 P: 202.739.8187 M: 410.456.0756 E: mgk@nei.org nei.org This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Page 222 of 408 Sent through Page 223 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.34598-000001 Owner: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Filename: image001.jpg Last Modified: Wed Jan 17 14:45:25 CST 2018 Page 224 of 408 image001.jpg for Printe em: 1212 2Nt Int 1 of 1) Document ID: 0.7.395.9878 From: McFarland, Lisa M. To: McClure, John C. Cc: Bcc: Subject: FW: NEI membership news Date: Wed Jan 17 2018 10:38:51 CST Attachments: image001.jpg image002.jpg NEI Update from Don Brandt.pdf ~WRD000.jpg What is going on in the Entergy world? Maybe you have more backstory on this? From: KORSNICK, Maria [mailto:mgk@nei.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 6:34 AM Cc: GRP. ELT Subject: NEI membership news **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ To: Members of NEI Advisory Committees This is to inform you that NextEra and Entergy have made the business decision not to renew NEI membership for the 2018 calendar year. I am attaching the email that Don Brandt, NEI Chairman, sent to Executive Committee members informing them of these decisions. We are disappointed by the departures but remain committed to our role as the voice of the nuclear industry, representing the vast majority of the U.S. nuclear power generators on regulatory and policy issues. We remain dedicated to our mission and to the four objectives in the National Nuclear Energy Strategy: preserve, sustain, innovate and thrive. I appreciate the challenge this is for all of us, and thank you for your understanding. Maria Page 226 of 408 MARIA KORSNICK President and Chief Executive Officer 1201 F Street NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 P: 202.739.8187 M: 410.456.0756 E: mgk@nei.org nei.org This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 227 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.9878-000001 Owner: McFarland, Lisa M. Filename: image001.jpg Last Modified: Wed Jan 17 10:38:51 CST 2018 Page 228 of 408 image001.jpg for Printe em: 1214 2Nt Int 1 of 4) Document ID: 0.7.395.9878-000002 Owner: McFarland, Lisa M. Filename: image002.jpg Last Modified: Wed Jan 17 10:38:51 CST 2018 Page 230 of 408 3 image002.' for Printe em: 12141 2Nt Int 2 of 4) of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.9878-000003 Owner: McFarland, Lisa M. Filename: NEI Update from Don Brandt.pdf Last Modified: Wed Jan 17 10:38:51 CST 2018 Page 232 of 408 NEI Update from Don Brandt.pdf for Printed Item: 1214 ( Attachment 3 of 4) From: Donald.Brandt@pinnaclewest.com [mailto:Donald.Brandt@pinnaclewest.com] Sent: Friday, January 12, 2018 2:34 PM Subject: NEI Update from Don Brandt TO: NEI Executive Committee We have been informed by Entergy and NextEra that they have made the decision to withdraw from NEI membership. During the EEI board meeting in Scottsdale this week, Tom Farrell, Tom Fanning, Chris Crane, Nick Akins and I met with Leo Denault, Entergy’s CEO, to discuss his concerns and to reiterate the value of NEI to the industry and to his nuclear fleet. We implored him to reconsider his decision. There were also some one-on-one discussions with Jim Robo, NextEra’s CEO. Jim appears more hardened on his decision. We are clearly disappointed by these decisions. NEI is the voice of the nuclear industry and its work has never been more important. The fracturing of NEI’s membership at this critical time is unfortunate. We will continue to work closely with both Leo and Jim to change the outcome. In the interim, we must consider the impact to NEI due to their departure from the membership. Included in this is assessing the ramifications of sharing member-only NEI benefits with non-members. The most principal examples of these are the Personnel Access Data System (PADS) and the Combined Adversary Force (CAF) Program. These are two programs for which the industry shares the costs of management and administration. NEI management will provide the Executive Committee with a recommendation on how to manage non-member access to such benefits for our consideration and approval. As you know, NEI represents more than 60 years of service to the nuclear industry. Its purpose has always been to unify industry efforts to advance our regulatory and policy interests. NEI is the voice of our industry to regulators and decision-makers in Washington, the states and internationally. NEI speaks for the industry in public forums and media. This unified voice helps us all. I recognize that we all must make business decisions that reflect the best interests of our companies. But it is also imperative that we continue to act collectively in the best interest of our industry. Entergy and NextEra’s decisions will impact us all. I will keep you apprised of the situation. Please contact me if you have any questions. Best regards, Don Brandt Chairman, NEI Board of Directors and Executive Committee Donald E. Brandt Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Pinnacle West Capital Corporation Arizona Public Service Company 400 N. 5th Street Phoenix, AZ 85004 602-250-5602 donald.brandt@aps.com Page 233 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.9878-000004 Owner: McFarland, Lisa M. Filename: ~WRD000.jpg Last Modified: Wed Jan 17 10:38:51 CST 2018 Page 234 of 408 ~WRD000.jpg Printed Item: 12 Attachment 4 35 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5279 From: Pope, Patrick L. To: MANTSCH, Scott Cc: Bcc: Subject: Accepted: call with Maria Korsnick (NEI) Date: Wed Jan 17 2018 09:39:48 CST Attachments: Page 236 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.6696 From: MANTSCH, Scott To: MANTSCH, Scott ; Smith, Kimberly M. ; Pope, Patrick L. Cc: Bcc: Subject: call with Maria Korsnick (NEI) Date: Wed Jan 17 2018 09:35:25 CST Attachments: StartTime: Thu Jan 18 09:15:00 Central Standard Time 2018 EndTime: Thu Jan 18 10:00:00 Central Standard Time 2018 Location: She will call Mr. Pope at 402-563-5029 Recurring: No ShowReminder: No Accepted: Yes AcceptedTime: Wed Jan 17 09:39:00 Central Standard Time 2018 **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. ________________________________ This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. ________________________________ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 237 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.9862 From: BAWOROWSKY, Christina To: BAWOROWSKY, Christina ; POWERS, Robert ; mike.beer@align-strategies.com ; jenny.dijames@align-strategies.com ; chuck@mmathisgroup.com ; adam@owendc.com ; tom.ingram@ingramgroup.com ; lisa@kdindc.com ; plandrum@bgrdc.com ; brandi@ingramgroup.com ; jmantz@bgrdc.com ; mike@mmathisgroup.com ; Jeff@millerstrategies.com ; daryl@owendc.com ; dave@kdindc.com ; pat.pettey@align-strategies.com ; pat.raffaniello@lobbydc.com ; randi@kdindc.com ; djs@ds2group.org ; ewells@brgdc.com ; robbieaiken@pinnaclewest.com ; aalexanderjr@firstenergycorp.com ; carolyn.e.apostolou@hii-co.com ; AUSTGEN, Kati ; h1b6@pge.com ; Lake Barrett ; slbaskerville@bpa.gov ; ricardo.bernal@aecom.com ; BERRIGAN, Carol ; lbickwit@milchev.com ; Michael.brairton@pseg.com ; summer.b.bravo@xcelenergy.com ; David C. Brown ; BURNISON, Melissa ; bruce_burton@ibew.org ; donise.cameron@pseg.com ; aecannon@aep.com ; Robert Capstick ; Jackie Carney ; rwcarter@bwxt.com ; dwight.cates@fluor.com ; kelly.chapman@dominionenergy.com ; CHARLES, Chris Page 238 of 408 ; qiana.charles@sce.com ; amy.chiang@honeywell.com ; sarah.chilton@inl.gov ; zane.corriveau@dteenergy.com ; andy.coulouris@dteenergy.com ; Thomas Craig ; CSIZMADIA, Christine ; lisa.decker@cengllc.com ; cadeegan@bechtel.com ; Tom DePonty ; jcdobken@energy-northwest.com ; sdodd@smart-union.org ; martin.doern@xcelenergy.com ; emily.duncan@exeloncorp.com ; duvallsb@westinghouse.com ; oearenfight@bgrdc.com ; renee.eastman@srpnet.com ; jeckard@firstenergycorp.com ; bob.ekstrom@pinnaclewest.com ; ELMORE, Baker ; kathleen.etxegoien@hii-nns.com ; sgarrison@ameren.com ; david.gilbert@exeloncorp.com ; frank_gillespie@mnes-us.com ; Gorman Prochaska, Pamela ; agrealy@firstenergycorp.com ; mlhall@firstenergycorp.com ; HANSON, Jerud ; dehende3@wcnoc.com ; jcherbert@energy-northwest.com ; Jim Hickey ; cory.hicks@fluor.com ; caseyhill@energysolutions.com ; j8h1@pge.com ; john.holt@nreca.coop ; alexander.hoppes@areva.com ; Devin Horne ; jake.a.hostrander@sargentlundy.com ; howej@centrusenergy.com ; Page 239 of 408 Vicki.Hull@dominionenergy.com ; apkavanagh@aep.com ; rkay@vistraenergy.com ; sakopple@bwxt.com ; KRAFT, Steven ; maura.krautner@aptim.com ; Julie.LaBella@talenenergy.com ; clane@x-energy.com ; jmlenard@tva.gov ; lopattjt@westinghouse.com ; kristen.ludecke@pseg.com ; joshua.madrigal@areva.com ; bmadru@valhi.net ; jcmaierhofer@tva.gov ; MANTSCH, Scott ; stephen.marlo@aptim.com ; MARSHALL, Beverly ; david.marventano@fluor.com ; chris.mathey@exeloncorp.com ; sally.mcAllister@exeloncorp.com ; McClure, John C. ; McGAREY, Michael ; helen@helenmilby.com ; colleen.moss@duke-energy.com ; cmount@firstenergycorp.com ; Pepper.natonski@duke-energy.com ; MNEWTON@southernco.com ; john.obrien@nrgenergy.com ; katie.ott@exeloncorp.com ; mjpaoli@energy-northwest.com ; crpierce@southernco.com ; stephen.l.plevniak@xcelenergy.com ; jpower@ameren.com ; amy.pressler@edisonintl.com ; nicolas.quinones@srpnet.com ; debra.raggio@talenenergy.com ; Reddick, Darani ; mjriith@southernco.com ; paola.rozzi@aptim.com ; bdr@dairynet.com ; ryan.serote@srpnet.com ; michael.sewell@duke-energy.com ; jsharkey@southernco.com Page 240 of 408 ; paula@kdindc.com ; adsmith@energy-northwest.com ; Tim Smith ; ksteckelberg@eei.org ; glen.tait@inl.gov ; heather.teilhet@opc.com ; tongour@tchgroup.com ; ctoth@publicpower.org ; TUFTS, Julie ; Michael R. Tuosto ; VAN VARICK, Lisa ; Voyles,, Seth- Omaha Public Power District ; charles@helenmilby.com ; daniel.walsh@nreca.coop ; dwaterhouse@publicpower.org ; jmweisgall@midamerican.com ; elizabeth@meguirewhitney.com ; bewilkinson@tva.gov ; jhwolak@southernco.com ; yostpa@westinghouse.com Cc: Bcc: Subject: Date: Attachments: NEI Governmental Affairs Standing Committee January 23 at 10 AM Wed Jan 17 2018 09:27:59 CST StartTime: Tue Jan 23 09:00:00 Central Standard Time 2018 EndTime: Tue Jan 23 10:00:00 Central Standard Time 2018 Location: 122 C Street, NW, Suite 830 Recurring: No ShowReminder: No Accepted: No **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. ________________________________ To: NEI GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE The first NEI Governmental Affairs Standing Committee meeting of 2018 will be held next Tuesday, January 23, 10:00 am at our Capitol Hill Conference Center, 122 C Street, NW, Suite 830. Please note the new time. Our guest speaker will be Michael Catanzaro, Special Assistant to the President for Domestic Energy and Environmental Policy. This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly Page 241 of 408 prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. ________________________________ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 242 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.34591 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. To: Higgins, Shirley A. ; Dentlinger, Courtney A. Cc: Bcc: Subject: FW: NEI membership news Date: Wed Jan 17 2018 09:11:47 CST Attachments: image001.jpg NEI Update from Don Brandt.pdf FYI From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 9:11 AM To: Corporate Communications Subject: FW: NEI membership news NUCLEAR GROUP LOSES TWO UTILITIES: The nuclear power industry's central lobbying outfit in D. C. is losing two of its utility member companies, NextEra and Entergy. Nuclear Energy Institute CEO Maria Korsnick said the two companies "made the business decision not to renew" their memberships with the trade association. NextEra and Entergy operate more than a dozen reactors, and both had seats on NEI's board of directors. The companies declined to comment. "We are disappointed by the decision but remain committed to our role as the voice of the nuclear industry representing the vast majority of the U.S. nuclear power generators on regulatory and policy issues," Korsnick said in a statement to ME. NEI board chairman Don Brandt insists the group's work to advance the industry's policy interests "has never been more important." It's been a tough 18-months for NEI. The group has parted ways with three senior executives since the summer of 2016, and conducted a restructuring a year ago that cut about 15 staff - moves that reflect some of the industry's struggles From: Pope, Patrick L. Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2018 8:37 PM To: EPC List; Kimball, David S. Subject: FW: NEI membership news FYI. Pat Page 243 of 408 (402) 469-4436 – cell Safety & Security – See something? SAY something! From: KORSNICK, Maria [mailto:mgk@nei.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2018 5:36 PM Cc: GRP. ELT Subject: NEI membership news **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ To: NEI Board of Directors This is to inform you that NextEra and Entergy have made the business decision not to renew NEI membership for the 2018 calendar year. I am attaching the letter that Don Brandt, NEI Chairman, sent to Executive Committee members informing them of these decisions. We are disappointed by the departures but remain committed to our role as the voice of the nuclear industry, representing the vast majority of the U.S. nuclear power generators on regulatory and policy issues. We remain dedicated to our mission and to the four objectives in the National Nuclear Energy Strategy: preserve, sustain, innovate and thrive. NEI’s Executive Committee is considering how we address any non-member use of our products. Once we finalize our recommendation, we will better understand the impact. I will keep you informed as this situation evolves. This is a time for us to pull together and focus on the important work we do to support the industry. We owe that to all of our members. I appreciate the challenge this is for all of us, and thank you for your understanding. Maria Page 244 of 408 MARIA KORSNICK President and Chief Executive Officer 1201 F Street NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 P: 202.739.8187 M: 410.456.0756 E: mgk@nei.org nei.org This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 245 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.34591-000001 Owner: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Filename: image001.jpg Last Modified: Wed Jan 17 09:11:47 CST 2018 Page 246 of 408 image001.jpg for Printe em: 1222 2Nt Int 1 of 2) of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.34591-000002 Owner: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Filename: NEI Update from Don Brandt.pdf Last Modified: Wed Jan 17 09:11:47 CST 2018 Page 248 of 408 NEI Update from Don Brandt.pdf for Printed Item: 1222 ( Attachment 2 of 2) From: Donald.Brandt@pinnaclewest.com [mailto:Donald.Brandt@pinnaclewest.com] Sent: Friday, January 12, 2018 2:34 PM Subject: NEI Update from Don Brandt TO: NEI Executive Committee We have been informed by Entergy and NextEra that they have made the decision to withdraw from NEI membership. During the EEI board meeting in Scottsdale this week, Tom Farrell, Tom Fanning, Chris Crane, Nick Akins and I met with Leo Denault, Entergy’s CEO, to discuss his concerns and to reiterate the value of NEI to the industry and to his nuclear fleet. We implored him to reconsider his decision. There were also some one-on-one discussions with Jim Robo, NextEra’s CEO. Jim appears more hardened on his decision. We are clearly disappointed by these decisions. NEI is the voice of the nuclear industry and its work has never been more important. The fracturing of NEI’s membership at this critical time is unfortunate. We will continue to work closely with both Leo and Jim to change the outcome. In the interim, we must consider the impact to NEI due to their departure from the membership. Included in this is assessing the ramifications of sharing member-only NEI benefits with non-members. The most principal examples of these are the Personnel Access Data System (PADS) and the Combined Adversary Force (CAF) Program. These are two programs for which the industry shares the costs of management and administration. NEI management will provide the Executive Committee with a recommendation on how to manage non-member access to such benefits for our consideration and approval. As you know, NEI represents more than 60 years of service to the nuclear industry. Its purpose has always been to unify industry efforts to advance our regulatory and policy interests. NEI is the voice of our industry to regulators and decision-makers in Washington, the states and internationally. NEI speaks for the industry in public forums and media. This unified voice helps us all. I recognize that we all must make business decisions that reflect the best interests of our companies. But it is also imperative that we continue to act collectively in the best interest of our industry. Entergy and NextEra’s decisions will impact us all. I will keep you apprised of the situation. Please contact me if you have any questions. Best regards, Don Brandt Chairman, NEI Board of Directors and Executive Committee Donald E. Brandt Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Pinnacle West Capital Corporation Arizona Public Service Company 400 N. 5th Street Phoenix, AZ 85004 602-250-5602 donald.brandt@aps.com Page 249 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5370 From: KORSNICK, Maria To: Cc: GRP. ELT Bcc: Subject: NEI membership news Date: Wed Jan 17 2018 06:34:28 CST Attachments: image001.jpg NEI Update from Don Brandt.pdf **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ To: Members of NEI Advisory Committees This is to inform you that NextEra and Entergy have made the business decision not to renew NEI membership for the 2018 calendar year. I am attaching the email that Don Brandt, NEI Chairman, sent to Executive Committee members informing them of these decisions. We are disappointed by the departures but remain committed to our role as the voice of the nuclear industry, representing the vast majority of the U.S. nuclear power generators on regulatory and policy issues. We remain dedicated to our mission and to the four objectives in the National Nuclear Energy Strategy: preserve, sustain, innovate and thrive. I appreciate the challenge this is for all of us, and thank you for your understanding. Maria MARIA KORSNICK President and Chief Executive Officer 1201 F Street NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 P: 202.739.8187 M: 410.456.0756 E: mgk@nei.org nei.org Page 250 of 408 This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 251 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5370-000001 Owner: KORSNICK, Maria Filename: image001.jpg Last Modified: Wed Jan 17 06:34:28 CST 2018 Page 252 of 408 image001.jpg for Printe em: 1225 2Nt Int 1 of 2) Document ID: 0.7.395.5370-000002 Owner: KORSNICK, Maria Filename: NEI Update from Don Brandt.pdf Last Modified: Wed Jan 17 06:34:28 CST 2018 Page 254 of 408 NEI Update from Don Brandt.pdf for Printed Item: 1225 ( Attachment 2 of 2) From: Donald.Brandt@pinnaclewest.com [mailto:Donald.Brandt@pinnaclewest.com] Sent: Friday, January 12, 2018 2:34 PM Subject: NEI Update from Don Brandt TO: NEI Executive Committee We have been informed by Entergy and NextEra that they have made the decision to withdraw from NEI membership. During the EEI board meeting in Scottsdale this week, Tom Farrell, Tom Fanning, Chris Crane, Nick Akins and I met with Leo Denault, Entergy’s CEO, to discuss his concerns and to reiterate the value of NEI to the industry and to his nuclear fleet. We implored him to reconsider his decision. There were also some one-on-one discussions with Jim Robo, NextEra’s CEO. Jim appears more hardened on his decision. We are clearly disappointed by these decisions. NEI is the voice of the nuclear industry and its work has never been more important. The fracturing of NEI’s membership at this critical time is unfortunate. We will continue to work closely with both Leo and Jim to change the outcome. In the interim, we must consider the impact to NEI due to their departure from the membership. Included in this is assessing the ramifications of sharing member-only NEI benefits with non-members. The most principal examples of these are the Personnel Access Data System (PADS) and the Combined Adversary Force (CAF) Program. These are two programs for which the industry shares the costs of management and administration. NEI management will provide the Executive Committee with a recommendation on how to manage non-member access to such benefits for our consideration and approval. As you know, NEI represents more than 60 years of service to the nuclear industry. Its purpose has always been to unify industry efforts to advance our regulatory and policy interests. NEI is the voice of our industry to regulators and decision-makers in Washington, the states and internationally. NEI speaks for the industry in public forums and media. This unified voice helps us all. I recognize that we all must make business decisions that reflect the best interests of our companies. But it is also imperative that we continue to act collectively in the best interest of our industry. Entergy and NextEra’s decisions will impact us all. I will keep you apprised of the situation. Please contact me if you have any questions. Best regards, Don Brandt Chairman, NEI Board of Directors and Executive Committee Donald E. Brandt Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Pinnacle West Capital Corporation Arizona Public Service Company 400 N. 5th Street Phoenix, AZ 85004 602-250-5602 donald.brandt@aps.com Page 255 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5280 From: Pope, Patrick L. To: EPC List ; Kimball, David S. Cc: Bcc: Subject: FW: NEI membership news Date: Tue Jan 16 2018 20:36:43 CST Attachments: image001.jpg image002.jpg NEI Update from Don Brandt.pdf FYI. Pat (402) 469-4436 – cell Safety & Security – See something? SAY something! From: KORSNICK, Maria [mailto:mgk@nei.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2018 5:36 PM Cc: GRP. ELT Subject: NEI membership news **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ To: NEI Board of Directors This is to inform you that NextEra and Entergy have made the business decision not to renew NEI membership for the 2018 calendar year. I am attaching the letter that Don Brandt, NEI Chairman, sent to Executive Committee members informing them of these decisions. We are disappointed by the departures but remain committed to our role as the voice of the nuclear industry, representing the vast majority of the U.S. nuclear power generators on regulatory and policy issues. We remain dedicated to our mission and to the four objectives in the National Nuclear Energy Page 256 of 408 Strategy: preserve, sustain, innovate and thrive. NEI’s Executive Committee is considering how we address any non-member use of our products. Once we finalize our recommendation, we will better understand the impact. I will keep you informed as this situation evolves. This is a time for us to pull together and focus on the important work we do to support the industry. We owe that to all of our members. I appreciate the challenge this is for all of us, and thank you for your understanding. Maria MARIA KORSNICK President and Chief Executive Officer 1201 F Street NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 P: 202.739.8187 M: 410.456.0756 E: mgk@nei.org nei.org This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to Page 257 of 408 another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 258 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5280-000001 Owner: Pope, Patrick L. Filename: image001.jpg Last Modified: Tue Jan 16 20:36:43 CST 2018 Page 259 of 408 image001.jpg for Printe em: 1228 2Nt Int 1 of 3) Document ID: 0.7.395.5280-000002 Owner: Pope, Patrick L. Filename: image002.jpg Last Modified: Tue Jan 16 20:36:43 CST 2018 Page 261 of 408 3 image002.' for Printe em: 1228 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5280-000003 Owner: Pope, Patrick L. Filename: NEI Update from Don Brandt.pdf Last Modified: Tue Jan 16 20:36:43 CST 2018 Page 263 of 408 NEI Update from Don Brandt.pdf for Printed Item: 1228 ( Attachment 3 of 3) From: Donald.Brandt@pinnaclewest.com [mailto:Donald.Brandt@pinnaclewest.com] Sent: Friday, January 12, 2018 2:34 PM Subject: NEI Update from Don Brandt TO: NEI Executive Committee We have been informed by Entergy and NextEra that they have made the decision to withdraw from NEI membership. During the EEI board meeting in Scottsdale this week, Tom Farrell, Tom Fanning, Chris Crane, Nick Akins and I met with Leo Denault, Entergy’s CEO, to discuss his concerns and to reiterate the value of NEI to the industry and to his nuclear fleet. We implored him to reconsider his decision. There were also some one-on-one discussions with Jim Robo, NextEra’s CEO. Jim appears more hardened on his decision. We are clearly disappointed by these decisions. NEI is the voice of the nuclear industry and its work has never been more important. The fracturing of NEI’s membership at this critical time is unfortunate. We will continue to work closely with both Leo and Jim to change the outcome. In the interim, we must consider the impact to NEI due to their departure from the membership. Included in this is assessing the ramifications of sharing member-only NEI benefits with non-members. The most principal examples of these are the Personnel Access Data System (PADS) and the Combined Adversary Force (CAF) Program. These are two programs for which the industry shares the costs of management and administration. NEI management will provide the Executive Committee with a recommendation on how to manage non-member access to such benefits for our consideration and approval. As you know, NEI represents more than 60 years of service to the nuclear industry. Its purpose has always been to unify industry efforts to advance our regulatory and policy interests. NEI is the voice of our industry to regulators and decision-makers in Washington, the states and internationally. NEI speaks for the industry in public forums and media. This unified voice helps us all. I recognize that we all must make business decisions that reflect the best interests of our companies. But it is also imperative that we continue to act collectively in the best interest of our industry. Entergy and NextEra’s decisions will impact us all. I will keep you apprised of the situation. Please contact me if you have any questions. Best regards, Don Brandt Chairman, NEI Board of Directors and Executive Committee Donald E. Brandt Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Pinnacle West Capital Corporation Arizona Public Service Company 400 N. 5th Street Phoenix, AZ 85004 602-250-5602 donald.brandt@aps.com Page 264 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5356 From: Bill Pitesa To: Cc: Bcc: Subject: NSIAC Steering Group: January 19 Conference Call Date: Tue Jan 16 2018 15:53:53 CST Attachments: NSIAC DNP Jan 19.pptx **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ January 16, 2018 TO: Nuclear Strategic Issues Advisory Committee Steering Group SUBJECT: January 19 Conference Call NEI will conduct a conference call with the NSIAC Steering Group this Friday, January 19, at noon Eastern. The phone number is (800)-496-4518, Pass code 121214#. The agenda for the call is provided below and read-ahead materials are attached. Welcome We will debrief on any significant interactions with Commissioners or NRC senior management. Bill Pitesa Delivering the Nuclear Promise Report on DNP Industry Coordinating Group initial actions including coordination of improvement opportunities, plans to sunset the DNP efficiency teams and transfer DNP responsibilities to existing industry peer groups, and approach to six “special focus” areas that appear to have potential for transformative efficiencies. Desired Outcome: Steering Group awareness. Joe Pollock FLEX equipment data collection The FLEX equipment failure information being voluntarily provided by the industry has not been Page 265 of 408 sufficient to accurately estimate FLEX equipment failure rates. This information is needed to support regulatory applications where credit for FLEX equipment is being sought. The NRC is seeking access to the data to help risk informed decision making for applications as well. Desired Outcome: Reinforce the need for utilities to continue to report FLEX equipment failures to the EPRI database, and obtain feedback from NSIACSG regarding NRC access to the data. Greg Krueger FERC Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) – Cyber Security Incident Reporting Provide an overview of the recently published NOPR and the actions planned by the industry. Desired Outcome: Steering Group awareness and feedback. Chris Earls Innovation and Transformation at the NRC Review NRC initiative to update the regulatory framework to promote new and innovative technologies. Desired Outcome: Steering Group awareness Bill Pitesa Update on Key Events We will provide an update on major decisions or events that have transpired since our last meeting Desired Outcome: Steering Group awareness. Bill Pitesa Other Topics Adjourn Sincerely, Bill Pitesa Chief Nuclear Officer Nuclear Energy Institute 1201 F Street NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 Page 266 of 408 www.nei.org P: 202.739.8081 C: 704.989.0943 E: wp@nei.org This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 267 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5356-000001 Owner: Bill Pitesa Filename: NSIAC DNP Jan 19.pptx Last Modified: Tue Jan 16 15:53:53 CST 2018 Page 268 of 408 NSIAC DNP Jan 19.pptx for Printed Item: 1232 ( Attachment 1 of 1) Joe Pollack Steve Kraft Ben Youman January 19, 2018 DNP INDUSTRY COORDINATING GROUP UPDATE Desired Outcome: NSIAC-SG awareness with, and feedback on, DNP go-forward strategy from newly formed industry coordinating group and focus areas. Page 269 of 408 NSIAC DNP Jan 19.pptx for Printed Item: 1232 ( Attachment 1 of 1) DNP Industry Coordinating Group (DNP-ICG): Mission • Drive next round of impactful and transformative industry efficiency improvements • Accelerate industry expert teams development and accountability of efficiency initiatives to increase the enduring value of nuclear power • Assist the Nuclear Strategic Issues Advisory Committee Steering Group (NSIAC-SG) in its executive oversight role of DNP development and implementation Page 270 of 408 NSIAC DNP Jan 19.pptx for Printed Item: 1232 ( Attachment 1 of 1) DNP-ICG: Recent Actions • DNP-ICG defined the next phase of DNP protocols and processes for assessing industry DNP initiatives (Efficiency Opportunities and Efficiency Bulletins) o Goal remains 5-7 transformative efficiency bulletins per year (~$500K savings/site or a compelling reason for NSIAC sponsorship and approval) • In-flight DNP initiative review o o o None ready for immediate consideration (~20 active) Recommend new process, reviews and categorizations will apply to all going forward Additional efficiencies can be drawn from the original Improvement Opportunities •Existing DNP Efficiency Teams will be “sunset” o o o DNP responsibilities will be transferred to existing industry expert teams Communication will be sent to industry teams’ leads/sponsors (Target: Jan 31) DNP-ICG will engage with existing expert teams to assure continued efficiency development, reviews and approvals Page 271 of 408 NSIAC DNP Jan 19.pptx for Printed Item: 1232 ( Attachment 1 of 1) DNP-ICG: Focus Areas and Next Actions • Identified six focus areas with potential for transformative efficiency improvements based on existing Improvement Opportunities and DNP-ICG industry experience: o o o Chemistry EP RP o o o Security Training Remote Monitoring • Each focus area will be part of existing industry expert team or a new limitedterm task force to finalize development o Sponsors of expert teams will be contacted by DNP-ICG sponsor to assure alignment (Target: Jan. 31) • DNP-ICG will embed representatives in existing industry expert teams that align with the six focus areas to ensure development and assessment of new DNP Initiatives for NSIAC review Page 272 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5252 From: Nuclear Energy Overview To: Kent, Thomas J. Cc: Bcc: Subject: Nuclear Energy Overview - Jan. 11, 2018 Date: Fri Jan 12 2018 07:06:31 CST Attachments: **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Nuclear Energy Overview January 11, 2018 This week's top story — NEI Urges Prompt Action on Market Reform in Wake of FERC Rejection The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission this week declined to adopt the U.S. Department of Energy's proposal that would have required organized markets to compensate "fuel-secure" baseload electricity generators for the resiliency they provide to the U.S. grid. However, FERC's Jan. 8 order directed all regional transmission organizations (RTOs) and independent system operators (ISOs) to assess the resilience of the bulk power system and recommend additional actions to mitigate any identified issues. NEI called the decision a "missed opportunity" to support nuclear plants at risk of closure, but is encouraged by FERC's new commitment to evaluate the issue of resiliency. Other Stories this week — · NRC Approves NuScale Design Innovation · Columbia Nuclear Plant Provides Jobs, Clean Air for Northwest You can view Overview by clicking here. _____ Nuclear Energy Overview's daily news service provides the latest information on industry topics, legislation and more. For news as it happens, bookmark the NEO page and check frequently for new content. Or click for a roll-up of this week's stories in PDF format. Nuclear Energy Institute _____ Your questions, comments, suggestions or any additions to the mailing list are welcome. We can be reached at overview@nei.org. We look forward to hearing from you. For more information, visit www.nei.org. Page 273 of 408 Unsubscribe from these messages. twitter facebook You Tube RSS Flickr Blogger This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Page 274 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5244 From: LIPMAN, Daniel To: Cc: ESPINOSA, Krista ; JONES, Ted Bcc: Subject: Save the Date! 9th Annual Pillsbury / NEI Seminar Date: Thu Jan 11 2018 13:01:46 CST Attachments: image001.jpg image002.jpg image003.jpg image004.jpg image005.jpg image006.gif image007.png image008.png image009.png image010.gif **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ TO: NEI Members Please see the Save the Date below. If you have any questions regarding this event, please contact Ted Jones (thj@nei.org 202.739.8169). Best, Dan Daniel S. Lipman Vice President, New Reactors and International Programs 1201 F Street, NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 P: 202.739.8115 M: 202.361.2861 nei.org Page 275 of 408 Having trouble reading this email? View it in your browser 9th ANNUAL Pillsbury / NEI Seminar Hot-Button Issues in International Nuclear Trade Save the date for the 9th Annual Pillsbury and Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Seminar as we discuss hot-button issues in nuclear trade and export controls. Look for your formal invitation soon with full agenda and speaker details. Page 276 of 408 Wednesday, February 28, 2018 8:00am - 7:30pm ET Continental breakfast and lunch will be provided. Pillsbury's Office in Washington, DC 1200 Seventeenth Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 pillsburylaw.com © 2018 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP. All rights reserved. Page 277 of 408 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, +1.888.387.5714 1200 Seventeenth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20036, USA manage your email preferences unsubscribe This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 278 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5244-000001 Owner: LIPMAN, Daniel Filename: image001.jpg Last Modified: Thu Jan 11 13:01:46 CST 2018 Page 279 of 408 image001.jpg for Document ID: 0.7.395.5244-000002 Owner: LIPMAN, Daniel Filename: image002.jpg Last Modified: Thu Jan 11 13:01:46 CST 2018 Page 281 of 408 image002.' for Document ID: 0.7.395.5244-000003 Owner: LIPMAN, Daniel Filename: image003.jpg Last Modified: Thu Jan 11 13:01:46 CST 2018 Page 283 of 408 Page 284 of 408 m:1 35(Attachment3 of 10) Document ID: 0.7.395.5244-000004 Owner: LIPMAN, Daniel Filename: image004.jpg Last Modified: Thu Jan 11 13:01:46 CST 2018 Page 285 of 408 image004.jpg for Printed Item. 1235( Attachment4of 10) IHS WI Page 286 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5244-000005 Owner: LIPMAN, Daniel Filename: image005.jpg Last Modified: Thu Jan 11 13:01:46 CST 2018 Page 287 of 408 image005'.1pg for Printed Item. 1235 At ttachmanLiof 10) Document ID: 0.7.395.5244-000006 Owner: LIPMAN, Daniel Filename: image006.gif Last Modified: Thu Jan 11 13:01:46 CST 2018 Page 289 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5244-000007 Owner: LIPMAN, Daniel Filename: image007.png Last Modified: Thu Jan 11 13:01:46 CST 2018 Page 291 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5244-000008 Owner: LIPMAN, Daniel Filename: image008.png Last Modified: Thu Jan 11 13:01:46 CST 2018 Page 293 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5244-000009 Owner: LIPMAN, Daniel Filename: image009.png Last Modified: Thu Jan 11 13:01:46 CST 2018 Page 295 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5244-000010 Owner: LIPMAN, Daniel Filename: image010.gif Last Modified: Thu Jan 11 13:01:46 CST 2018 Page 297 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.8375 From: NEI 2018 Conferences To: McClure, John C. Cc: Bcc: Subject: Coming Soon: 2018 NEI Nuclear Conferences Date: Tue Jan 09 2018 11:36:44 CST Attachments: **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Mark Your Calendar Now 2018 CONFERENCE AND WORKSHOP CALENDAR UPCOMING EVENTS Nuclear Fuel Supply Forum The Mayflower Washington, D.C. Jan. 17 REGISTER NOW Mitigating Beyond Design Basis Events Omni Shoreham Hotel Washington, D.C. Jan. 30–31 REGISTER NOW National Operator Licensing Workshop New Orleans Marriott New Orleans, La. Feb. 21–22 Cyber Security Implementation Workshop Savannah International Trade & Convention Center Savannah, Ga. March 5–7 REGISTER NOW R&D Nuclear Summit Long View Gallery Washington, D.C. March 6–7 Risk Informed Regulation & Fire Protection Forum Hyatt Regency Cincinnati Cincinnati, Ohio April 10–12 World Nuclear Fuel Cycle The Westin Palace Madrid, Spain April 17–19 REGISTER NOW Page 299 of 408 Used Fuel Management Conference Savannah International Trade & Convention Center Savannah, Ga. May 1–3 Nuclear Energy Assembly Atlanta Marriott Marquis Atlanta, Ga. May 21–23 National Security & Emergency Preparedness Summit Loews Sapphire Falls Resort Orlando, Fla. June 25–29 Radiological Effluents & Environmental Workshop Royal Sonesta New Orleans New Orleans, La. June 25–28 Nuclear Fuel Supply Forum The Mayflower Washington, D.C. July 24 U.S. Women in Nuclear Von Braun Center Huntsville, Ala. July 29–Aug. 1 Radiation Protection Forum Naples Grande Naples, Fla. July 29–Aug. 2 International Uranium Fuel Seminar Sheraton Boston Boston, Mass. Oct. 28–31 NEI's conferences and workshops offer nuclear industry professionals the opportunity to stay abreast of industry issues and trends that are important to their business. These events also provide a forum to interact with colleagues and business partners from around the world. For more information, please contact NEI's conferences team at conferences@nei.org or visit nei. org/conferences Arika Johnson Senior Manager amj@nei.org Ken Morton Manager kwm@nei.org Page 300 of 408 Michael Jordan Manager mjj@nei.org Caitlin Garlington Planner cmg@nei.org Denise Bell Registrar dxb@nei.org Nuclear Energy Institute · 1201 F Street N.W. Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20004 · 202.739.8000 www.nei.org Unsubscribe from these messages. Page 301 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.34513 From: Estrada, Roman M. To: Schieffer, Jeanne K. ; Citta Jr., Joseph L. ; Lemke, Kenneth M. ; Plettner, Mary M. ; Kimball, David S. ; Dentlinger, Courtney A. ; Higgins, Shirley A. Cc: Gentert, Brianna P. ; Becker, Mark C. ; Margheim, Scott A. ; Sanne, Brenda M. Bcc: Subject: RE: Draft text of the Cooper Economics Report Date: Mon Jan 08 2018 13:13:31 CST Attachments: image002.jpg Jeanne Here are my comments: ********* I would go with 680 direct jobs and 320 indirect jobs as the wording in this section (Key findings/Employment benefits) ********* Use “Carbon free emissions” in this section (Clean electricity for Nebraskans) ********* I would use the words “carbon-free” after each time you use the word “power” (Historical background/reliable electricity generation) ********* Under State and Regional Benefits, I would use GRID Stability and how this large power source maintains appropriate levels of inductance power (VARS) to compensate for when high levels of Wind energy is online ( due to their high turbine power factors) ********* Under State and regional benefits, there is also a national security aspect of having nuclear power to support overall grid stability with poor weather conditions and to maintain a nuclear asset that supports the nuclear defense programs with related science expertise and national energy research (next generation power, like SMRs) ********* Under emergency plan, we can say NPPD is using similar models in developing their Cyber Security response teams and processes as just noted in the recent GridEx exercise in Oct 2017 Roman Estrada Nuclear Efficiency Program Manager Cooper Nuclear Station From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Sent: Monday, January 08, 2018 6:50 AM To: EPC List; Citta Jr., Joseph L.; Lemke, Kenneth M.; Plettner, Mary M.; Kimball, David S.; Dentlinger, Courtney A.; Higgins, Shirley A.; Estrada, Roman M. Page 302 of 408 Cc: Gentert, Brianna P.; Becker, Mark C.; Margheim, Scott A.; Sanne, Brenda M. Subject: FW: Draft text of the Cooper Economics Report Good morning. Attached, you will find a draft of Cooper’s Economic Impact Study conducted by the Nuclear Energy institute. As noted, they will put the copy into a more colorful piece of collateral for distribution, but I wanted to get the report out to you for a review. Please let Ken Lemke and me know if you have any concerns or questions. He is more familiar with the REMI model used to derive the numbers. I assisted in providing the community information. I would like your feedback by Wednesday morning, if possible. Thank you. Jeanne Schieffer Corporate Communications & Public Relations Manager Nebraska Public Power District 1414 15th Street Columbus, NE 68601 402.910.2313 402.563.5990 Jkschie@nppd.com From: DESAI, Harsh [mailto:hsd@nei.org] Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2018 5:36 PM To: Schieffer, Jeanne K.; Lemke, Kenneth M. Subject: Draft text of the Cooper Economics Report **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Hi Jeanne and Ken, I’ve attached a draft text of the Cooper Economics Report for your review. Our Creative team is in process of turning this around into a very professional looking report. We expect to share it with you tomorrow. Our Comms folks will also be doing a thorough review to ensure it is consistent throughout. Would love your thoughts. Thanks, Harsh Harsh S. Desai Manager, Energy & Economic Analyses P: 202.739.8009 M: 202.344.9035 hsd@nei.org 1201 F Street, NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 GlobalMeet: https://nei.globalmeet.com/HarshDesai Conference Line: 1-888-450-5996 (Passcode: 957397) This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing Page 303 of 408 authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 304 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.34513-000001 Owner: Estrada, Roman M. Filename: image002.jpg Last Modified: Mon Jan 08 13:13:31 CST 2018 Page 305 of 408 image002.' for Printe em: 1247 3Nt Int 1 of 1) Document ID: 0.7.395.5052 From: Kimball, David S. To: Lemke, Kenneth M. ; Schieffer, Jeanne K. ; EPC List ; Citta Jr., Joseph L. ; Plettner, Mary M. ; Dentlinger, Courtney A. ; Higgins, Shirley A. ; Estrada, Roman M. Cc: Gentert, Brianna P. ; Becker, Mark C. ; Margheim, Scott A. ; Sanne, Brenda M. Bcc: Subject: RE: Draft text of the Cooper Economics Report Date: Mon Jan 08 2018 12:56:23 CST Attachments: image001.jpg image002.jpg Maybe “Carbon-free” emissions are better. Dave Kimball From: Lemke, Kenneth M. Sent: Monday, January 08, 2018 8:09 AM To: Schieffer, Jeanne K.; EPC List; Citta Jr., Joseph L.; Plettner, Mary M.; Kimball, David S.; Dentlinger, Courtney A.; Higgins, Shirley A.; Estrada, Roman M. Cc: Gentert, Brianna P.; Becker, Mark C.; Margheim, Scott A.; Sanne, Brenda M. Subject: RE: Draft text of the Cooper Economics Report All, FYI, these were my comments to Harsh. They are somewhat esoteric but should be easy to address. I had conveyed my concerns about the use of the term output in previous conversations with Harsh that took place several days ago. Page 307 of 408 largest single source of emission-free electricity (I question the use of such an all-inclusive expression as emission-free.) Cooper generates over $112 million in annual economic output, which includes over $66 million for the five counties surrounding the plant (The standard definition of the output would be the total value of electricity produced at Cooper. Value added or gross regional product, which is what I believe is being measured, would consist primarily of the wages and salaries of the workers plus some other small additions to the increase in value that occurs at Cooper). Kenneth M. Lemke, Ph.D. Economist Nebraska Public Power District (402)563-5535 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Sent: Monday, January 08, 2018 6:50 AM To: EPC List; Citta Jr., Joseph L.; Lemke, Kenneth M.; Plettner, Mary M.; Kimball, David S.; Dentlinger, Courtney A.; Higgins, Shirley A.; Estrada, Roman M. Cc: Gentert, Brianna P.; Becker, Mark C.; Margheim, Scott A.; Sanne, Brenda M. Subject: FW: Draft text of the Cooper Economics Report Good morning. Attached, you will find a draft of Cooper’s Economic Impact Study conducted by the Nuclear Energy institute. As noted, they will put the copy into a more colorful piece of collateral for distribution, but I wanted to get the report out to you for a review. Please let Ken Lemke and me know if you have any concerns or questions. He is more familiar with the REMI model used to derive the numbers. I assisted in providing the community information. I would like your feedback by Wednesday morning, if possible. Thank you. Page 308 of 408 Jeanne Schieffer Corporate Communications & Public Relations Manager Nebraska Public Power District 1414 15th Street Columbus, NE 68601 402.910.2313 402.563.5990 Jkschie@nppd.com From: DESAI, Harsh [mailto:hsd@nei.org] Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2018 5:36 PM To: Schieffer, Jeanne K.; Lemke, Kenneth M. Subject: Draft text of the Cooper Economics Report **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Hi Jeanne and Ken, I’ve attached a draft text of the Cooper Economics Report for your review. Our Creative team is in process of turning this around into a very professional looking report. We expect to share it with you tomorrow. Our Comms folks will also be doing a thorough review to ensure it is consistent throughout. Would love your thoughts. Thanks, Harsh Harsh S. Desai Manager, Energy & Economic Analyses P: 202.739.8009 M: 202.344.9035 hsd@nei.org 1201 F Street, NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 GlobalMeet: https://nei.globalmeet.com/HarshDesai Page 309 of 408 Conference Line: 1-888-450-5996 (Passcode: 957397) This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 310 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5052-000001 Owner: Kimball, David S. Filename: image001.jpg Last Modified: Mon Jan 08 12:56:23 CST 2018 Page 311 of 408 image001.jpg for Printe em: 1249 3Nt Int 1 of 2) of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5052-000002 Owner: Kimball, David S. Filename: image002.jpg Last Modified: Mon Jan 08 12:56:23 CST 2018 Page 313 of 408 3 image002.' for Printe em: 1249 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.34510 From: Dostal, Alan L. To: Schieffer, Jeanne K. ; Lemke, Kenneth M. ; Plettner, Mary M. ; Kimball, David S. ; Dentlinger, Courtney A. ; Higgins, Shirley A. ; Estrada, Roman M. ; Citta Jr., Joseph L. Cc: Gentert, Brianna P. ; Becker, Mark C. ; Margheim, Scott A. ; Sanne, Brenda M. Bcc: Subject: FW: Draft text of the Cooper Economics Report Date: Mon Jan 08 2018 12:27:00 CST Attachments: Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx image001.jpg Here are my comments. I would like Dave Kimball’s input on our characterization of our INPO performance. I have provided some substitute language for consideration. Thanks, Alan From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Sent: Monday, January 08, 2018 6:50 AM To: EPC List; Citta Jr., Joseph L.; Lemke, Kenneth M.; Plettner, Mary M.; Kimball, David S.; Dentlinger, Courtney A.; Higgins, Shirley A.; Estrada, Roman M. Cc: Gentert, Brianna P.; Becker, Mark C.; Margheim, Scott A.; Sanne, Brenda M. Subject: FW: Draft text of the Cooper Economics Report Good morning. Attached, you will find a draft of Cooper’s Economic Impact Study conducted by the Nuclear Energy Page 315 of 408 institute. As noted, they will put the copy into a more colorful piece of collateral for distribution, but I wanted to get the report out to you for a review. Please let Ken Lemke and me know if you have any concerns or questions. He is more familiar with the REMI model used to derive the numbers. I assisted in providing the community information. I would like your feedback by Wednesday morning, if possible. Thank you. Jeanne Schieffer Corporate Communications & Public Relations Manager Nebraska Public Power District 1414 15th Street Columbus, NE 68601 402.910.2313 402.563.5990 Jkschie@nppd.com From: DESAI, Harsh [mailto:hsd@nei.org] Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2018 5:36 PM To: Schieffer, Jeanne K.; Lemke, Kenneth M. Subject: Draft text of the Cooper Economics Report **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Hi Jeanne and Ken, I’ve attached a draft text of the Cooper Economics Report for your review. Our Creative team is in process of turning this around into a very professional looking report. We expect to share it with you tomorrow. Our Comms folks will also be doing a thorough review to ensure it is consistent throughout. Would love your thoughts. Thanks, Harsh Page 316 of 408 Harsh S. Desai Manager, Energy & Economic Analyses P: 202.739.8009 M: 202.344.9035 hsd@nei.org 1201 F Street, NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 GlobalMeet: https://nei.globalmeet.com/HarshDesai Conference Line: 1-888-450-5996 (Passcode: 957397) This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 317 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.34510-000001 Owner: Dostal, Alan L. Filename: Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx Last Modified: Mon Jan 08 12:27:00 CST 2018 Page 318 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1252 ( Attachment 1 of 2) Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station An Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute January, 2018 1 Page 319 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1252 ( Attachment 1 of 2) Table of Contents 2 Page 320 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1252 ( Attachment 1 of 2) Executive Summary The Cooper Nuclear Station (Cooper), located along the Missouri River in the southeast corner of Nebraska, has long been a vital part of the region’s energy portfolio, providing 100 percent carbon-free electricity since it began operating in 1974. In addition to this reliable, emissions-free electricity, the plant supports hundreds of direct jobs. Employee involvement in their community also makes Cooper a significant social and economic contributor to Nebraska. Cooper is Nebraska’s largest single source of emission-free electricity. To quantify the economic impacts of this facility in Nebraska, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) conducted an independent analysis. Based on data provided by Nebraska Public Power District (Cooper’s operator) on employment and operating expenditures, NEI conducted the analysis using the PI+ model provided by Regional Economic Models, Inc. (REMI), a nationally recognized model. Key Findings Cooper’s operations provide: Employment benefits Cooper Nuclear Station supports hundreds of jobs in the five regional counties surrounding the plant (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe, and Richardson) and the rest of Nebraska through its operations. NEI estimates that the total number of jobs supported by Cooper annually is over 1000 jobs. That includes over 680 jobs in the five counties surrounding the plant and 320 jobs in the rest of Nebraska. These employment numbers include the number of direct and additional jobs created as a result of the expenditures from Cooper operations. Economic stimulus Cooper produces significant economic benefits for Nebraska through its plant operations. NEI’s analysis finds that Cooper generates over $112 million in annual economic output, which includes over $66 million for the five counties surrounding the plant and more than $46 million for the rest of Nebraska. 2018 economic benefits for the Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe, and Richardson counties surrounding the Cooper Nuclear Station include:  $66 million economic output from plant operations  $63 million increase in gross domestic product  $70 million in disposal personal income. 2018 economic benefits for the rest of Nebraska include:  $46 million economic output from plant operations  $26 million increase in gross domestic product  $32 million in disposal personal income. 3 Page 321 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1252 ( Attachment 1 of 2) Long-term economic stimulus This study finds that between 2018 and 2034 (60-year license expiration date), Cooper’s operations will generate over $1.9 billion in economic output to Nebraska, including $1.2 billion to the five counties surrounding the plant and additional $675 million in the rest of Nebraska. Clean electricity for Nebraska Cooper’s operations generate nearly emissions-free clean electricity. Cooper prevents the release of more than 6.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually1, the same amount released by approximately 1.4 million cars every year2. For perspective, there are estimated 733,000 passenger cars in Nebraska3. Reliability benefits Cooper provides 820 megawatts of around-the-clock electricity through Nebraska Public Power District to the Southwest Power Pool, powering homes and businesses. During the past five years, the station has operated at more than 93 percent of capacity4, on par with the industry average and significantly higher than other forms of electricity generation. This reliable production helps offset potential price volatility of other energy sources (e.g. natural gas) and the intermittency of renewable electricity sources. Emissions prevented are calculated using the weighted average CO2 emissions rate (2095 lbs/MWh) for the Midwest Reliability Organization region, provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Nebraska Public Power District reported electricity generation of 6.9 million MWh in 2017. 2 Calculated using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator. https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator 3 Retrieved using January 2017 release of the Highway Statistics from the U.S. Department of Transportaiton Federal Highway Administration. 4 Retrieved using ABB Velocity Suite, which sourced the data from U.S. Energy Information Administration 1 4 Page 322 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1252 ( Attachment 1 of 2) Historical Background Cooper Nuclear Station is located along the Missouri River in the southeast corner of Nebraska. It consists of one Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) that produces 820 megawatts (MW) of non-emitting baseload power. Cooper Nuclear Station is owned and operated by Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) and supplies electric grid through the Southwest Power Pool, a regional transmission organization. Additional nuclear expertise is provided through a services agreement with Entergy Nuclear Nebraska. Cooper is named after Humboldt, Nebraska natives Guy Cooper, Sr., and Guy Cooper, Jr., in recognition of their contribution to public power in Nebraska. Cooper began commercial operation in 1974 under initial 40-year license, which was renewed in 2010 for additional 20-years, with new 60-year license expiration in 2034. Reliable electricity generation Cooper operated at a capacity factor of over 93 percent over the last five years [source #4]. Capacity factor, a measure of electricity production efficiency, is the ratio of actual electricity generated to the maximum possible electric generation during the year. As the sole nuclear power plant in Nebraska, Cooper generated more than 6.9 million megawatt-hours in 20175, a new record for the plant. This results in Cooper providing power to over 450,000 Nebraskans during a non-refueling outage year like 2017. Refueling outages occur every 24 months, with the next one scheduled for fall 2018. Thousands of local jobs Cooper employs approximately 680 people, including over 550 people from Nebraska.6 The annual payroll and benefits are more than $76 million for permanent employees and contractors, including over $60 million in the five counties surrounding the plant and more than $2.8 million in the rest of Nebraska. Most jobs at nuclear power plants require technical training and are typically among the highest-paying jobs in the area. Nationwide, nuclear energy jobs pay 36 percent more than average salaries in a plant’s local area.7 Safe and clean for the environment Generating clean energy is an important step in reducing the effects of climate change and vital to protecting the environment for current and future generations. Nuclear energy facilities generate large amount of electricity without emitting greenhouse gases. State and federal policymakers recognize nuclear energy as an essential source of safe, reliable electricity that meets both environmental needs and demand for electricity. Cooper, like all nuclear power plants, produces baseload power that is carbon-free. Cooper avoided the emission of over 6.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually [source 1], the same amount released by approximately 1.4 million cars every year Nebraska Public Power District reported the 2017 electricity generation to U.S. Energy Information Administration Form EIA-923. 6 Nebraska Public Power District provided 2016 actual employment numbers. 7 “Nuclear Energy’s Economic Benefits – Current and Future.” Nuclear Energy Institute, 2014. 5 5 Page 323 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1252 ( Attachment 1 of 2) [source 2]. For perspective, there are estimated 733,000 passenger cars in Nebraska [source 3]. Cooper also prevented the release of other air pollutants, over 7,900 short tons of sulfur dioxide8 and more than 5,590 short tons of nitrogen oxide9, which are precursors to acid rain and urban smog. Emissions prevented are calculated using the weighted average sulfur dioxide emissions rate (2.2994 lbs/MWh) for the Midwest Reliability Organization region, provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 9 Emissions prevented are calculated using the weighted average nitrogen oxide emissions rate (1.6203 lbs/MWh) for the Midwest Reliability Organization region, provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 8 6 Page 324 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1252 ( Attachment 1 of 2) State and Regional Benefits NEI used the REMI PI+ model (2.1.5) to analyze economic and expenditure data provided by NPPD to develop estimates of its economic benefits from Cooper Nuclear Station’s operations. More information on REMI can be found on [page for REMI section]. The economic impacts of Cooper discussed in this section consist of the following variables that are used to analyze these impacts: Output Output, in this context, refers to the economic activity generated by Cooper Nuclear Station. The direct output is the economic activity produced by the facility. The secondary output is the value of the economic activity generated in other industries because of Cooper, as well as how people employed at the facility influence the demand for goods and services within the region. Employment The direct employment is the number of jobs at Cooper. Secondary employment is jobs in other industries as a result of Cooper’s operations. Gross state product Cooper contributes to Nebraska’s gross state product, which the REMI model calculates as value of goods and services produced by labor and property – minus intermediate goods. For a nuclear plant, electricity is the final good. The intermediate goods are the components purchased to make that electricity. Disposable personal income Cooper contributes a significant sum to Nebraska’s disposal personal income, which is one of the indicators used by economists to monitor the state of economy. Disposable personal income identifies the available household money for spending and saving after accounting for the income taxes. State and Regional economic benefits Cooper’s total 2018 annual economic output impact on Nebraska is estimated to be over $112 million in direct and secondary impact, including over $66 million to the five regional counties surrounding the plant (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe, and Richardson) and more than $46 million for the rest of Nebraska. Cooper contributes more than $89 million to Nebraska’s gross state product in 2018, including $63 million to the five regional counties and over $25 million to the rest of Nebraska. Cooper also contributes approximately $102 million to Nebraska’s disposable personal income in 2018, including $70 million to the five regional counties and $32 million to the rest of Nebraska. 7 Page 325 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1252 ( Attachment 1 of 2) Table 1 summarizes the plant’s effects on the five regional counties and the rest of Nebraska’s economies, the gross state product, and disposable personal income in 2018 from operations. Cooper’s operations have substantial economic impact on other industries. Cooper’s output also stimulates the state’s and region’s labor income and employment. The plant employs approximately 528 people in permanent and contracting jobs in the five regional counties and 23 people in the rest of Nebraska10. These jobs stimulate over 450 additional jobs in the five regional counties and the rest of Nebraska. Table 2 details the quantity and types of jobs that Cooper supports. Plant workers are included in the table’s Utility occupation categories. Long-term economic benefits This study finds that between 2018 and 2034 (the license expiration date), Cooper’s operations will generate over $1.9 billion in economic output to Nebraska, including $1.2 billion to the five counties surrounding the plant and additional $675 million in the rest of Nebraska. Table 1 Cooper’s Impact on the Five Regional Counties Surrounding the Plant and Rest of Nebraska (2016 dollars, in millions) Description Five regional counties surrounding the plant (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe, and Richardson) - Output Direct and Secondary Economic Output11 2018 2018 to 2034 (license expiration) $66 - Gross State Product $63 - Disposable Personal Income $70 Rest of Nebraska - Output $46 - Gross State Product $25 - Disposable Personal $32 $1,239 $675 NPPD provided the 2016 actual employment numbers. Cooper also hires approximately 130 people across Iowa, Missouri, and elsewhere, however were not utilized for the purpose of this Nebraska-based study. 11 Direct output was calculated based on a four-year average between 2013 and 2016, in 2016 dollars. 10 8 Page 326 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1252 ( Attachment 1 of 2) Income Table 2 Job Impacts from Cooper Operations Category Utilities12 Retail Trade Other Services, except Public Administration Health Care and Social Assistance Accommodation and Food Services Finance and Insurance Construction Wholesale Trade Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation Manufacturing Real Estate and Rental and Leasing Transportation and Warehousing Administrative and Waste Management Services Other Industries TOTAL Five Regional Counties (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe, and Richardson) 528 81 19 Rest of Nebraska 23 64 35 551 145 54 16 14 9 6 2 1 57 26 16 10 11 19 73 40 25 16 13 20 1 1 1 7 6 9 8 7 10 1 1 6 18 7 18 1 681 Total 12 320 13 1001 Utilities sector includes direct employment at Cooper Nuclear Station in Nebraska and secondary employment from the rest of Nebraska to support the operations. 12 9 Page 327 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1252 ( Attachment 1 of 2) Community Leadership and Environmental Protection In addition to the economic benefits Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) contributes to the region in the forms of jobs, income, and economic output, NPPD and its employees plan a major role in the health and welfare of the community. NPPD has supported local community organizations through financial support and volunteerism. Community Engagement Community Leadership Cooper employees are active members of their communities. Cooper’s employees serve on city councils, coach athletic teams, and own local businesses. Cooper has also supported local events, such as the City of Auburn’s annual Spookfest during Halloween, that brings businesses together to hand-out candy to children dressed up for trick-or-treating. Cooper employees also volunteer in community parades, local chamber of commerce chili cook-offs, holiday angel tree gift donations, and school science fairs. School Programs Cooper Nuclear Station is directly involved with the Energy Generation Operations Program at the Southeast Community College (SECC). The program began in 2008 as a way to train future operators, and has emerged into a successful program that gives students hands-on operations training at the plant site. The students are prepared for employment at a nuclear power plant during the two-year program. NPPD has continuously provided opportunities to the students through tours, job shadowing experiences, and recruitment upon graduation. NPPD’s Energy Education team and communication professionals bring presentations to schools and local civic groups to educate them about the benefits of nuclear power and Cooper’s support for the community. Particularly in 2017, NPPD also set up its mobile STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) lab at Johnson High School for two weeks. Students and teachers, alike, take time to explore the lab, create, engineer and experience job-related tasks so as to understand the importance and excitement of a career in the energy industry. The mobile STEM lab is complemented by online curriculum models, in-class presentations, robotic interactions with students, and a statewide robotics program. At least four schools from around Cooper participated in one or more of Cooper’s energy education activities in 2017. Site Tours NPPD encourages tours of facilities among our community. Cooper employees host the Nebraska LEAD Program of the Nebraska Agriculture Leadership Council tours Cooper annually as part of the educational site visits. Cooper has hosted visitors from the USS Nebraska (SSBN-739), a nuclear-powered, Ohio-class submarine. Cooper also 10 Page 328 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1252 ( Attachment 1 of 2) continuously hosts tours for the Nebraska National Guard, local law enforcement, state dignitaries, international visitors, and local schools and colleges. NPPD conducts 20 tours of the Cooper Nuclear Station on average every year. Plant Neighbor Survey Recent survey of the Cooper Nuclear Station showed exceptional support from the local residents, compared to the benchmarks from other nuclear power plants.13 The results are comparable to the same survey conducted in 2011. Ninety-two percent of Cooper’s neighbors have a favorable impression of the plant and its recent operations; 71 percent have a very favorable impression. In addition, 88 percent of Cooper’s neighbors favor nuclear energy. Respondents’ indicated their support for Cooper is based on perceptions of the plant’s safe operations and their favorable view of NPPD regarding economic impact and jobs, safety, community outreach and protecting the environment. The survey also found:  94 percent of respondents are confident in NPPD’s ability to operate a nuclear power plant safely;  93 percent of Cooper’s neighbors believe nuclear energy will be important to meeting the nation’s electricity needs;  93 percent said NPPD is doing a good job of protecting the environment;  84 percent feel somewhat well informed about nuclear energy; and  72 percent believe people living near a nuclear plant are unlikely to be exposed to harmful levels of radiation. Environmental Stewardship and Public Safety There have been no adverse environmental effects ever recorded at Cooper Nuclear Station. The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program at Cooper monitors radiation in ambient air, drinking water, river water, farm animal milk samples, soil, sediment, river fish, and local vegetation. Samples are analyzed by independent vendor and the results are provided to public and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which have never exceeded regulatory limits. Fire Brigade and Emergency Medical Technicians Cooper maintains an on-site fire brigade, whose more than 90 employees include certified as emergency medical technicians (EMTs). Additionally, all Cooper employees are trained to perform first responder duties in the event of an emergency. The Hazardous Material Emergency Response Plan also identifies The survey was conducted by Bisconti Research, Inc. and Quest Global Research in the fall of 2017. Approximately 250 people living within 10 miles of Cooper Nuclear Station were surveyed. The purpose of the survey was to measure the opinions of local residents about the plant as a neighbor, employer, and economic engine. 13 11 Page 329 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1252 ( Attachment 1 of 2) specifically trained individuals and teams to respond to particular events (such as spills, fires, or medical emergencies), if required. This dedication to safety expands beyond Cooper. Members of fire brigade also support their local fire departments, and Cooper’s EMTs also serve on area response crews. They also participate in and lead training courses for area fire departments and rescue squads. Emergency Preparedness Plan NPPD’s Cooper operations always prioritize safety. NPPD partners with the States of Nebraska and Missouri to ensure the public safety is always top of mind. In addition, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission carefully regulates and tests the validity of Cooper’s Emergency Preparedness Plan, designed to protect public health and safety in the unlikely event of an incident. High training standards and well-qualified staff demonstrate NPPD’s commitment to ensure that the physical environment is safe for all residents. Cooper’s tests this plan multiple times throughout the year. Exercises and drills are conducted both onsite and in partnership with the Nebraska Emergency Management Agency and the State of Missouri Emergency Management Agency, as well as county, state and local law enforcement, and regulatory entities such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Cooper provides both emergency information and an in-home radio alert system to residents living within a 10-mile radius of the plant. Personnel qualifications Cooper’s Fitness for Duty Program ensures employees are qualified to access the site. Employees are hired after a stringent background check and drug screening. NPPD conducts random daily drug tests to measure and monitor employee performance. Cooper is also home to Cooper Nuclear Station Learning Center which provides comprehensive training for employees on a variety of industry and operational programs. A specially-designed simulator of the power plant’s control room assists in training NPPD personnel to operate the plant in both normal and emergency conditions. Industry Performance and Regulatory Standing Cooper Nuclear Station was recognized by the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations in 2016 for achieving a high-level of performance excellence. Cooper was also recognized as a top-performing plant. I am not comfortable with this statement. Dave Kimball, I would appreciate your thoughts on this paragraph. I would be comfortable mentioning that NPPD and Cooper Nuclear Station is a member of the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations which was founded after the Three Mile Island nuclear accident in 1979. The mission at the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) is to promote the highest levels of safety and reliability – to promote excellence – in the operation of commercial nuclear power plants. 12 Page 330 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1252 ( Attachment 1 of 2) Cooper has continues to perform in the best category of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Reactor Oversight Process Action Matrix. 13 Page 331 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1252 ( Attachment 1 of 2) Economic Impact Analysis Methodology This analysis uses the REMI PI+ version 2.1.5 model to estimate the economic and fiscal impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station. Regional Economic Models Inc. Regional Economic Models Inc. (REMI), is a modeling firm is a modeling firm specializing in services related to economic impacts and policy analysis, headquartered in Amherst, Massachusetts. It provides software, support services, and issue-based expertise and consulting in almost every state, the District of Columbia, and other countries in North America, Europe, Latin America, the Middle East and Asia. The REMI model has two main purposes: forecasting and analysis of alternatives. All models have a “baseline” forecast of the future of a regional economy at the county level. Using “policy variables,” in REMI terminology, provides scenarios based on different situations. The ability to model policy variables makes it a powerful tool for conveying the economic “story” behind policy. The model translates various considerations into understandable concepts like GDP and jobs. REMI relies on data from public sources, including the Bureau of Economic Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Energy Information Administration and the Census Bureau. Forecasts for future macroeconomic conditions in REMI come from a combination of resources, which serve as the main framework for the software model needed to perform simulations. Policy Insight Plus REMI’s Policy Insight Plus (PI+) is a computerized, multiregional, dynamic model of the states or other subnational units of the United States economy. PI+ relies on four quantitative methodologies to guide its approach to economic modeling: 1) Input/output tabulation (IO)—IO models, sometimes called “social accounting matrices” (SAM), quantify the interrelation of industries and households in a computational sense. It models the flow of goods between firms in supply chains, wages paid to households, and final consumption by households, governments and the international market. These channels create the “multiplier” effect of $1 going further than when accounting for its echoing. 2) Computable general equilibrium (CGE)—CGE modeling adds market concepts to the IO structure. This includes how IO structures evolve over time and how they respond to alternative policies. CGE incorporates concepts on markets for labor, housing, consumer goods, imports and the importance of competitiveness to fostering economic growth over time. Changing one of these will influence the others—for instance, a new knife factory would improve the labor market and then bring it to a head by increasing migration into the area, driving housing and rent prices higher, and inducing the market to create a new subdivision to return to “market clearing” conditions. 14 Page 332 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1252 ( Attachment 1 of 2) 3) Econometrics—REMI uses statistical parameters and historical data to populate the numbers inside the IO and CGE portions. The estimation of the different parameters, elasticity terms and figures gives the strength of various responses. It also gives the “time-lags” from the beginning of a policy to the point where markets have had a chance to clear. 4) New economic geography—Economic geography provides REMI a sense of economies of scale and agglomeration. This is the quantification of the strength of clusters in an area and their influence on productivity. One example would include the technology and research industries in Seattle. The labor in the area specializes to serve firms like Amazon and Microsoft and, thus, their long-term productivity grows more quickly than that of smaller regions with no proclivity towards software development (such as Helena, Montana). The same is true on the manufacturing side with physical inputs, such as with the supply chain for Boeing and Paccar in Washington in the production of transportation equipment. Final assembly will have a close relationship and a high degree of proximity to its suppliers of parts, repairs, transportation and other professional services, which show up in clusters in the state. 15 Page 333 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1252 ( Attachment 1 of 2) Conclusion Economic and Employment Impacts NEI’s analysis finds that Cooper generates more than $112 million in annual economic output in Nebraska through its continued operations. This includes over $66 million for the five regional counties surrounding the station (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe, and Richardson) and more than $46 million for the rest of Nebraska. NEI’s analysis also finds that Cooper supports more than 1,000 jobs annually, which includes 680 jobs in the five regional counties and more 320 jobs in the rest of Nebraska from continued operations. Further Benefits of Cooper The station’s economic benefits – through wages and purchases of supplies and services – are considerable. In addition, plant employees further stimulate the local economy by purchasing goods and services from businesses around the area, supporting many small businesses in Nebraska. The facility generated 6.9 megawatt-hours of emissions-free electricity in 2017, enough to serve the yearly needs for hundreds of thousands of homes, all while producing carbon-free power. The Cooper Nuclear Station is a leader economically, fiscally, environmentally and socially within Nebraska. 16 Page 334 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.34510-000002 Owner: Dostal, Alan L. Filename: image001.jpg Last Modified: Mon Jan 08 12:27:00 CST 2018 Page 335 of 408 image001.jpg for Printe em: 1252 3Nt Int 2 of 2) Document ID: 0.7.395.7726 From: Lemke, Kenneth M. To: Schieffer, Jeanne K. ; EPC List ; Citta Jr., Joseph L. ; Plettner, Mary M. ; Kimball, David S. ; Dentlinger, Courtney A. ; Higgins, Shirley A. ; Estrada, Roman M. Cc: Gentert, Brianna P. ; Becker, Mark C. ; Margheim, Scott A. ; Sanne, Brenda M. Bcc: Subject: RE: Draft text of the Cooper Economics Report Date: Mon Jan 08 2018 08:09:10 CST Attachments: image002.jpg image003.jpg All, FYI, these were my comments to Harsh. They are somewhat esoteric but should be easy to address. I had conveyed my concerns about the use of the term output in previous conversations with Harsh that took place several days ago. largest single source of emission-free electricity (I question the use of such an all-inclusive expression as emission-free.) Cooper generates over $112 million in annual economic output, which includes over $66 million for the five counties surrounding the plant (The standard definition of the output would be the total value of electricity produced at Cooper. Value added or gross regional product, which is what I believe is being measured, would consist primarily of the wages and salaries of the workers plus some other small additions to the increase in value that occurs at Cooper). Kenneth M. Lemke, Ph.D. Page 337 of 408 Economist Nebraska Public Power District (402)563-5535 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Sent: Monday, January 08, 2018 6:50 AM To: EPC List; Citta Jr., Joseph L.; Lemke, Kenneth M.; Plettner, Mary M.; Kimball, David S.; Dentlinger, Courtney A.; Higgins, Shirley A.; Estrada, Roman M. Cc: Gentert, Brianna P.; Becker, Mark C.; Margheim, Scott A.; Sanne, Brenda M. Subject: FW: Draft text of the Cooper Economics Report Good morning. Attached, you will find a draft of Cooper’s Economic Impact Study conducted by the Nuclear Energy institute. As noted, they will put the copy into a more colorful piece of collateral for distribution, but I wanted to get the report out to you for a review. Please let Ken Lemke and me know if you have any concerns or questions. He is more familiar with the REMI model used to derive the numbers. I assisted in providing the community information. I would like your feedback by Wednesday morning, if possible. Thank you. Jeanne Schieffer Corporate Communications & Public Relations Manager Nebraska Public Power District 1414 15th Street Columbus, NE 68601 402.910.2313 402.563.5990 Jkschie@nppd.com From: DESAI, Harsh [mailto:hsd@nei.org] Page 338 of 408 Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2018 5:36 PM To: Schieffer, Jeanne K.; Lemke, Kenneth M. Subject: Draft text of the Cooper Economics Report **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Hi Jeanne and Ken, I’ve attached a draft text of the Cooper Economics Report for your review. Our Creative team is in process of turning this around into a very professional looking report. We expect to share it with you tomorrow. Our Comms folks will also be doing a thorough review to ensure it is consistent throughout. Would love your thoughts. Thanks, Harsh Harsh S. Desai Manager, Energy & Economic Analyses P: 202.739.8009 M: 202.344.9035 hsd@nei.org 1201 F Street, NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 GlobalMeet: https://nei.globalmeet.com/HarshDesai Conference Line: 1-888-450-5996 (Passcode: 957397) This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to Page 339 of 408 another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 340 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.7726-000001 Owner: Lemke, Kenneth M. Filename: image002.jpg Last Modified: Mon Jan 08 08:09:10 CST 2018 Page 341 of 408 image002.' for Printe em: 1255 3Nt Int 1 of 2) of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.7726-000002 Owner: Lemke, Kenneth M. Filename: image003.jpg Last Modified: Mon Jan 08 08:09:10 CST 2018 Page 343 of 408 3 image003. for Printe em: 1255 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.7569 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. To: Cc: Bcc: Subject: FW: Draft text of the Cooper Economics Report Date: Mon Jan 08 2018 06:49:30 CST Attachments: @ This message has been archived. View the original item https://evserver1.prd.nppdnet.com/EnterpriseVault/Search/htmlview.aspx? VaultId=18EB80426A36846468A1525317022BC3C1110000evsite.prd.nppdnet. com&SavesetId=201802027530959~201801081249330000~Z~004D3761F94475438A9EBC0E67E5A C41View the original item Good morning. Attached, you will find a draft of Cooper’s Economic Impact Study conducted by the Nuclear Energy institute. As noted, they will put the copy into a more colorful piece of collateral for distribution, but I wanted to get the re Attachments: image001.jpg (15 KB) https://evserver1.prd.nppdnet.com/EnterpriseVault/Search/htmlview.aspx? VaultId=18EB80426A36846468A1525317022BC3C1110000evsite.prd.nppdnet. com&SavesetId=201802027530959~201801081249330000~Z~004D3761F94475438A9EBC0E67E5A C41&AttachmentId=1image001.jpg Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx (49 KB) https://evserver1.prd.nppdnet.com/EnterpriseVault/Search/htmlview.aspx? VaultId=18EB80426A36846468A1525317022BC3C1110000evsite.prd.nppdnet. com&SavesetId=201802027530959~201801081249330000~Z~004D3761F94475438A9EBC0E67E5A C41&AttachmentId=2Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx Page 345 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.7569-000001 Owner: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Filename: @ Last Modified: Mon Jan 08 06:49:30 CST 2018 Page 346 of 408 01395.?569?000001 Attachment Name: Locator: 1:eebcdaH9335f5f544dETb63cedU? 1133501]; This. iS emphr (1.3-: its. length is. zero byte-5} Page 347 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5003 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. To: EPC List ; Citta Jr., Joseph L. ; Lemke, Kenneth M. ; Plettner, Mary M. ; Kimball, David S. ; Dentlinger, Courtney A. ; Higgins, Shirley A. ; Estrada, Roman M. Cc: Gentert, Brianna P. ; Becker, Mark C. ; Margheim, Scott A. ; Sanne, Brenda M. Bcc: Subject: FW: Draft text of the Cooper Economics Report Date: Mon Jan 08 2018 06:49:30 CST Attachments: Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx image001.jpg Good morning. Attached, you will find a draft of Cooper’s Economic Impact Study conducted by the Nuclear Energy institute. As noted, they will put the copy into a more colorful piece of collateral for distribution, but I wanted to get the report out to you for a review. Please let Ken Lemke and me know if you have any concerns or questions. He is more familiar with the REMI model used to derive the numbers. I assisted in providing the community information. I would like your feedback by Wednesday morning, if possible. Thank you. Jeanne Schieffer Corporate Communications & Public Relations Manager Nebraska Public Power District 1414 15th Street Columbus, NE 68601 402.910.2313 Page 348 of 408 402.563.5990 Jkschie@nppd.com From: DESAI, Harsh [mailto:hsd@nei.org] Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2018 5:36 PM To: Schieffer, Jeanne K.; Lemke, Kenneth M. Subject: Draft text of the Cooper Economics Report **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Hi Jeanne and Ken, I’ve attached a draft text of the Cooper Economics Report for your review. Our Creative team is in process of turning this around into a very professional looking report. We expect to share it with you tomorrow. Our Comms folks will also be doing a thorough review to ensure it is consistent throughout. Would love your thoughts. Thanks, Harsh Harsh S. Desai Manager, Energy & Economic Analyses P: 202.739.8009 M: 202.344.9035 hsd@nei.org 1201 F Street, NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 GlobalMeet: https://nei.globalmeet.com/HarshDesai Conference Line: 1-888-450-5996 (Passcode: 957397) This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly Page 349 of 408 prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 350 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5003-000001 Owner: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Filename: Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx Last Modified: Mon Jan 08 06:49:30 CST 2018 Page 351 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1260 ( Attachment 1 of 2) Economic Impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station An Analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute January, 2018 1 Page 352 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1260 ( Attachment 1 of 2) Table of Contents 2 Page 353 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1260 ( Attachment 1 of 2) Executive Summary The Cooper Nuclear Station (Cooper), located along the Missouri River in the southeast corner of Nebraska, has long been a vital part of the region’s energy portfolio, providing 100 percent carbon-free electricity since it began operating in 1974. In addition to this reliable, emissions-free electricity, the plant supports hundreds of direct jobs. Employee involvement in their community also makes Cooper a significant social and economic contributor to Nebraska. Cooper is Nebraska’s largest single source of emission-free electricity. To quantify the economic impacts of this facility in Nebraska, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) conducted an independent analysis. Based on data provided by Nebraska Public Power District (Cooper’s operator) on employment and operating expenditures, NEI conducted the analysis using the PI+ model provided by Regional Economic Models, Inc. (REMI), a nationally recognized model. Key Findings Cooper’s operations provide: Employment benefits Cooper Nuclear Station supports hundreds of jobs in the five regional counties surrounding the plant (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe, and Richardson) and the rest of Nebraska through its operations. NEI estimates that the total number of jobs supported by Cooper annually is over 1000 jobs. That includes over 680 jobs in the five counties surrounding the plant and 320 jobs in the rest of Nebraska. These employment numbers include the number of direct and additional jobs created as a result of the expenditures from Cooper operations. Economic stimulus Cooper produces significant economic benefits for Nebraska through its plant operations. NEI’s analysis finds that Cooper generates over $112 million in annual economic output, which includes over $66 million for the five counties surrounding the plant and more than $46 million for the rest of Nebraska. 2018 economic benefits for the Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe, and Richardson counties surrounding the Cooper Nuclear Station include:  $66 million economic output from plant operations  $63 million increase in gross domestic product  $70 million in disposal personal income. 2018 economic benefits for the rest of Nebraska include:  $46 million economic output from plant operations  $26 million increase in gross domestic product  $32 million in disposal personal income. 3 Page 354 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1260 ( Attachment 1 of 2) Long-term economic stimulus This study finds that between 2018 and 2034 (60-year license expiration date), Cooper’s operations will generate over $1.9 billion in economic output to Nebraska, including $1.2 billion to the five counties surrounding the plant and additional $675 million in the rest of Nebraska. Clean electricity for Nebraska Cooper’s operations generate emissions-free clean electricity. Cooper prevents the release of more than 6.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually1, the same amount released by approximately 1.4 million cars every year2. For perspective, there are estimated 733,000 passenger cars in Nebraska3. Reliability benefits Cooper provides 820 megawatts of around-the-clock electricity through Nebraska Public Power District to the Southwest Power Pool, powering homes and businesses. During the past five years, the station has operated at more than 93 percent of capacity4, on par with the industry average and significantly higher than other forms of electricity generation. This reliable production helps offset potential price volatility of other energy sources (e.g. natural gas) and the intermittency of renewable electricity sources. Emissions prevented are calculated using the weighted average CO2 emissions rate (2095 lbs/MWh) for the Midwest Reliability Organization region, provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Nebraska Public Power District reported electricity generation of 6.9 million MWh in 2017. 2 Calculated using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator. https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator 3 Retrieved using January 2017 release of the Highway Statistics from the U.S. Department of Transportaiton Federal Highway Administration. 4 Retrieved using ABB Velocity Suite, which sourced the data from U.S. Energy Information Administration 1 4 Page 355 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1260 ( Attachment 1 of 2) Historical Background Cooper Nuclear Station is located along the Missouri River in the southeast corner of Nebraska. It consists of one Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) that produces 820 megawatts (MW) of non-emitting baseload power. Cooper Nuclear Station is owned and operated by Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) and supplies electric grid through the Southwest Power Pool, a regional transmission organization. Additional nuclear expertise is provided through a services agreement with Entergy Nuclear Nebraska. Cooper is named after Humboldt, Nebraska natives Guy Cooper, Sr., and Guy Cooper, Jr., in recognition of their contribution to public power in Nebraska. Cooper began commercial operation in 1974 under initial 40-year license, which was renewed in 2010 for additional 20-years, with new 60-year license expiration in 2034. Reliable electricity generation Cooper operated at a capacity factor of over 93 percent over the last five years [source #4]. Capacity factor, a measure of electricity production efficiency, is the ratio of actual electricity generated to the maximum possible electric generation during the year. As the sole nuclear power plant in Nebraska, Cooper generated more than 6.9 million megawatt-hours in 20175, a new record for the plant. This results in Cooper providing power to over 450,000 Nebraskans during a non-refueling outage year like 2017. Refueling outages occur every 24 months, with the next one scheduled for fall 2018. Thousands of local jobs Cooper employs approximately 680 people, including over 550 people from Nebraska.6 The annual payroll and benefits are more than $76 million for permanent employees and contractors, including over $60 million in the five counties surrounding the plant and more than $2.8 million in the rest of Nebraska. Most jobs at nuclear power plants require technical training and are typically among the highest-paying jobs in the area. Nationwide, nuclear energy jobs pay 36 percent more than average salaries in a plant’s local area.7 Safe and clean for the environment Generating clean energy is an important step in reducing the effects of climate change and vital to protecting the environment for current and future generations. Nuclear energy facilities generate large amount of electricity without emitting greenhouse gases. State and federal policymakers recognize nuclear energy as an essential source of safe, reliable electricity that meets both environmental needs and demand for electricity. Cooper, like all nuclear power plants, produces baseload power that is carbon-free. Cooper avoided the emission of over 6.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually [source 1], the same amount released by approximately 1.4 million cars every year Nebraska Public Power District reported the 2017 electricity generation to U.S. Energy Information Administration Form EIA-923. 6 Nebraska Public Power District provided 2016 actual employment numbers. 7 “Nuclear Energy’s Economic Benefits – Current and Future.” Nuclear Energy Institute, 2014. 5 5 Page 356 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1260 ( Attachment 1 of 2) [source 2]. For perspective, there are estimated 733,000 passenger cars in Nebraska [source 3]. Cooper also prevented the release of other air pollutants, over 7,900 short tons of sulfur dioxide8 and more than 5,590 short tons of nitrogen oxide9, which are precursors to acid rain and urban smog. Emissions prevented are calculated using the weighted average sulfur dioxide emissions rate (2.2994 lbs/MWh) for the Midwest Reliability Organization region, provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 9 Emissions prevented are calculated using the weighted average nitrogen oxide emissions rate (1.6203 lbs/MWh) for the Midwest Reliability Organization region, provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 8 6 Page 357 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1260 ( Attachment 1 of 2) State and Regional Benefits NEI used the REMI PI+ model (2.1.5) to analyze economic and expenditure data provided by NPPD to develop estimates of its economic benefits from Cooper Nuclear Station’s operations. More information on REMI can be found on [page for REMI section]. The economic impacts of Cooper discussed in this section consist of the following variables that are used to analyze these impacts: Output Output, in this context, refers to the economic activity generated by Cooper Nuclear Station. The direct output is the economic activity produced by the facility. The secondary output is the value of the economic activity generated in other industries because of Cooper, as well as how people employed at the facility influence the demand for goods and services within the region. Employment The direct employment is the number of jobs at Cooper. Secondary employment is jobs in other industries as a result of Cooper’s operations. Gross state product Cooper contributes to Nebraska’s gross state product, which the REMI model calculates as value of goods and services produced by labor and property – minus intermediate goods. For a nuclear plant, electricity is the final good. The intermediate goods are the components purchased to make that electricity. Disposable personal income Cooper contributes a significant sum to Nebraska’s disposal personal income, which is one of the indicators used by economists to monitor the state of economy. Disposable personal income identifies the available household money for spending and saving after accounting for the income taxes. State and Regional economic benefits Cooper’s total 2018 annual economic output impact on Nebraska is estimated to be over $112 million in direct and secondary impact, including over $66 million to the five regional counties surrounding the plant (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe, and Richardson) and more than $46 million for the rest of Nebraska. Cooper contributes more than $89 million to Nebraska’s gross state product in 2018, including $63 million to the five regional counties and over $25 million to the rest of Nebraska. Cooper also contributes approximately $102 million to Nebraska’s disposable personal income in 2018, including $70 million to the five regional counties and $32 million to the rest of Nebraska. 7 Page 358 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1260 ( Attachment 1 of 2) Table 1 summarizes the plant’s effects on the five regional counties and the rest of Nebraska’s economies, the gross state product, and disposable personal income in 2018 from operations. Cooper’s operations have substantial economic impact on other industries. Cooper’s output also stimulates the state’s and region’s labor income and employment. The plant employs approximately 528 people in permanent and contracting jobs in the five regional counties and 23 people in the rest of Nebraska10. These jobs stimulate over 450 additional jobs in the five regional counties and the rest of Nebraska. Table 2 details the quantity and types of jobs that Cooper supports. Plant workers are included in the table’s Utility occupation categories. Long-term economic benefits This study finds that between 2018 and 2034 (the license expiration date), Cooper’s operations will generate over $1.9 billion in economic output to Nebraska, including $1.2 billion to the five counties surrounding the plant and additional $675 million in the rest of Nebraska. Table 1 Cooper’s Impact on the Five Regional Counties Surrounding the Plant and Rest of Nebraska (2016 dollars, in millions) Description Five regional counties surrounding the plant (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe, and Richardson) - Output Direct and Secondary Economic Output11 2018 2018 to 2034 (license expiration) $66 - Gross State Product $63 - Disposable Personal Income $70 Rest of Nebraska - Output $46 - Gross State Product $25 - Disposable Personal $32 $1,239 $675 NPPD provided the 2016 actual employment numbers. Cooper also hires approximately 130 people across Iowa, Missouri, and elsewhere, however were not utilized for the purpose of this Nebraska-based study. 11 Direct output was calculated based on a four-year average between 2013 and 2016, in 2016 dollars. 10 8 Page 359 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1260 ( Attachment 1 of 2) Income Table 2 Job Impacts from Cooper Operations Category Utilities12 Retail Trade Other Services, except Public Administration Health Care and Social Assistance Accommodation and Food Services Finance and Insurance Construction Wholesale Trade Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation Manufacturing Real Estate and Rental and Leasing Transportation and Warehousing Administrative and Waste Management Services Other Industries TOTAL Five Regional Counties (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe, and Richardson) 528 81 19 Rest of Nebraska 23 64 35 551 145 54 16 14 9 6 2 1 57 26 16 10 11 19 73 40 25 16 13 20 1 1 1 7 6 9 8 7 10 1 1 6 18 7 18 1 681 Total 12 320 13 1001 Utilities sector includes direct employment at Cooper Nuclear Station in Nebraska and secondary employment from the rest of Nebraska to support the operations. 12 9 Page 360 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1260 ( Attachment 1 of 2) Community Leadership and Environmental Protection In addition to the economic benefits Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) contributes to the region in the forms of jobs, income, and economic output, NPPD and its employees plan a major role in the health and welfare of the community. NPPD has supported local community organizations through financial support and volunteerism. Community Engagement Community Leadership Cooper employees are active members of their communities. Cooper’s employees serve on city councils, coach athletic teams, and own local businesses. Cooper has also supported local events, such as the City of Auburn’s annual Spookfest during Halloween, that brings businesses together to hand-out candy to children dressed up for trick-or-treating. Cooper employees also volunteer in community parades, local chamber of commerce chili cook-offs, holiday angel tree gift donations, and school science fairs. School Programs Cooper Nuclear Station is directly involved with the Energy Generation Operations Program at the Southeast Community College (SECC). The program began in 2008 as a way to train future operators, and has emerged into a successful program that gives students hands-on operations training at the plant site. The students are prepared for employment at a nuclear power plant during the two-year program. NPPD has continuously provided opportunities to the students through tours, job shadowing experiences, and recruitment upon graduation. NPPD’s Energy Education team and communication professionals bring presentations to schools and local civic groups to educate them about the benefits of nuclear power and Cooper’s support for the community. Particularly in 2017, NPPD also set up its mobile STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) lab at Johnson High School for two weeks. Students and teachers, alike, take time to explore the lab, create, engineer and experience job-related tasks so as to understand the importance and excitement of a career in the energy industry. The mobile STEM lab is complemented by online curriculum models, in-class presentations, robotic interactions with students, and a statewide robotics program. At least four schools from around Cooper participated in one or more of Cooper’s energy education activities in 2017. Site Tours NPPD encourages tours of facilities among our community. Cooper employees host the Nebraska LEAD Program of the Nebraska Agriculture Leadership Council tours Cooper annually as part of the educational site visits. Cooper recently hosted the visitors from the USS Nebraska (SSBN-739), a nuclear-powered, Ohio-class submarine. Cooper also 10 Page 361 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1260 ( Attachment 1 of 2) continuously hosts tours for the Nebraska National Guard, local law enforcement, state dignitaries, international visitors, and local schools and colleges. NPPD conducts 20 tours of the Cooper Nuclear Station on average every year. Plant Neighbor Survey Recent survey of the Cooper Nuclear Station showed exceptional support from the local residents, compared to the benchmarks from other nuclear power plants.13 The results are comparable to the same survey conducted in 2011. Ninety-two percent of Cooper’s neighbors have a favorable impression of the plant and its recent operations; 71 percent have a very favorable impression. In addition, 88 percent of Cooper’s neighbors favor nuclear energy. Respondents’ indicated their support for Cooper is based on perceptions of the plant’s safe operations and their favorable view of NPPD regarding economic impact and jobs, safety, community outreach and protecting the environment. The survey also found:  94 percent of respondents are confident in NPPD’s ability to operate a nuclear power plant safely;  93 percent of Cooper’s neighbors believe nuclear energy will be important to meeting the nation’s electricity needs;  93 percent said NPPD is doing a good job of protecting the environment;  84 percent feel somewhat well informed about nuclear energy; and  72 percent believe people living near a nuclear plant are unlikely to be exposed to harmful levels of radiation. Environmental Stewardship and Public Safety There have been no adverse environmental effects ever recorded at Cooper Nuclear Station. The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program at Cooper monitors radiation in ambient air, drinking water, river water, farm animal milk samples, soil, sediment, river fish, and local vegetation. Samples are analyzed by independent vendor and the results are provided to public and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which have never exceeded regulatory limits. Fire Brigade and Emergency Medical Technicians Cooper maintains an on-site fire brigade, whose more than 90 employees include certified as emergency medical technicians (EMTs). Additionally, all Cooper employees are trained to perform first responder duties in the event of an emergency. The Hazardous Material Emergency Response Plan also identifies The survey was conducted by Bisconti Research, Inc. and Quest Global Research in the fall of 2017. Approximately 250 people living within 10 miles of Cooper Nuclear Station were surveyed. The purpose of the survey was to measure the opinions of local residents about the plant as a neighbor, employer, and economic engine. 13 11 Page 362 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1260 ( Attachment 1 of 2) specifically trained individuals and teams to respond to particular events (such as spills, fires, or medical emergencies), if required. This dedication to safety expands beyond Cooper. Members of fire brigade also support their local fire departments, and Cooper’s EMTs also serve on area response crews. They also participate in and lead training courses for area fire departments and rescue squads. Emergency Preparedness Plan NPPD’s Cooper operations always prioritize safety. NPPD partners with the States of Nebraska and Missouri to ensure the public safety is always top of mind. In addition, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission carefully regulates and tests the validity of Cooper’s Emergency Preparedness Plan, designed to protect public health and safety in the unlikely event of an incident. High training standards and well-qualified staff demonstrate NPPD’s commitment to ensure that the physical environment is safe for all residents. Cooper’s tests this plan multiple times throughout the year. Exercises and drills are conducted both onsite and in partnership with the Nebraska Emergency Management Agency and the State of Missouri Emergency Management Agency, as well as county, state and local law enforcement, and regulatory entities such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Cooper provides both emergency information and an in-home radio alert system to residents living within a 10-mile radius of the plant. Personnel qualifications Cooper’s Fitness for Duty Program ensures employees are qualified to access the site. Employees are hired after a stringent background check and drug screening. NPPD conducts random daily drug tests to measure and monitor employee performance. Cooper is also home to Cooper Nuclear Station Learning Center which provides comprehensive training for employees on a variety of industry and operational programs. A specially-designed simulator of the power plant’s control room assists in training NPPD personnel to operate the plant in both normal and emergency conditions. Industry Performance and Regulatory Standing Cooper Nuclear Station was recognized by the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations in 2016 for achieving a high-level of performance excellence since 1991. Cooper was also recognized as a top-performing plant. Cooper has continues to perform in the best category of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Reactor Oversight Process Action Matrix. 12 Page 363 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1260 ( Attachment 1 of 2) Economic Impact Analysis Methodology This analysis uses the REMI PI+ version 2.1.5 model to estimate the economic and fiscal impacts of the Cooper Nuclear Station. Regional Economic Models Inc. Regional Economic Models Inc. (REMI), is a modeling firm is a modeling firm specializing in services related to economic impacts and policy analysis, headquartered in Amherst, Massachusetts. It provides software, support services, and issue-based expertise and consulting in almost every state, the District of Columbia, and other countries in North America, Europe, Latin America, the Middle East and Asia. The REMI model has two main purposes: forecasting and analysis of alternatives. All models have a “baseline” forecast of the future of a regional economy at the county level. Using “policy variables,” in REMI terminology, provides scenarios based on different situations. The ability to model policy variables makes it a powerful tool for conveying the economic “story” behind policy. The model translates various considerations into understandable concepts like GDP and jobs. REMI relies on data from public sources, including the Bureau of Economic Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Energy Information Administration and the Census Bureau. Forecasts for future macroeconomic conditions in REMI come from a combination of resources, which serve as the main framework for the software model needed to perform simulations. Policy Insight Plus REMI’s Policy Insight Plus (PI+) is a computerized, multiregional, dynamic model of the states or other subnational units of the United States economy. PI+ relies on four quantitative methodologies to guide its approach to economic modeling: 1) Input/output tabulation (IO)—IO models, sometimes called “social accounting matrices” (SAM), quantify the interrelation of industries and households in a computational sense. It models the flow of goods between firms in supply chains, wages paid to households, and final consumption by households, governments and the international market. These channels create the “multiplier” effect of $1 going further than when accounting for its echoing. 2) Computable general equilibrium (CGE)—CGE modeling adds market concepts to the IO structure. This includes how IO structures evolve over time and how they respond to alternative policies. CGE incorporates concepts on markets for labor, housing, consumer goods, imports and the importance of competitiveness to fostering economic growth over time. Changing one of these will influence the others—for instance, a new knife factory would improve the labor market and then bring it to a head by increasing migration into the area, driving housing and rent prices higher, and inducing the market to create a new subdivision to return to “market clearing” conditions. 13 Page 364 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1260 ( Attachment 1 of 2) 3) Econometrics—REMI uses statistical parameters and historical data to populate the numbers inside the IO and CGE portions. The estimation of the different parameters, elasticity terms and figures gives the strength of various responses. It also gives the “time-lags” from the beginning of a policy to the point where markets have had a chance to clear. 4) New economic geography—Economic geography provides REMI a sense of economies of scale and agglomeration. This is the quantification of the strength of clusters in an area and their influence on productivity. One example would include the technology and research industries in Seattle. The labor in the area specializes to serve firms like Amazon and Microsoft and, thus, their long-term productivity grows more quickly than that of smaller regions with no proclivity towards software development (such as Helena, Montana). The same is true on the manufacturing side with physical inputs, such as with the supply chain for Boeing and Paccar in Washington in the production of transportation equipment. Final assembly will have a close relationship and a high degree of proximity to its suppliers of parts, repairs, transportation and other professional services, which show up in clusters in the state. 14 Page 365 of 408 Economic Impacts of Cooper Nuclear Station_rev2.docx for Printed Item: 1260 ( Attachment 1 of 2) Conclusion Economic and Employment Impacts NEI’s analysis finds that Cooper generates more than $112 million in annual economic output in Nebraska through its continued operations. This includes over $66 million for the five regional counties surrounding the station (Cass, Johnson, Nemaha, Otoe, and Richardson) and more than $46 million for the rest of Nebraska. NEI’s analysis also finds that Cooper supports more than 1,000 jobs annually, which includes 680 jobs in the five regional counties and more 320 jobs in the rest of Nebraska from continued operations. Further Benefits of Cooper The station’s economic benefits – through wages and purchases of supplies and services – are considerable. In addition, plant employees further stimulate the local economy by purchasing goods and services from businesses around the area, supporting many small businesses in Nebraska. The facility generated 6.9 megawatt-hours of emissions-free electricity in 2017, enough to serve the yearly needs for hundreds of thousands of homes, all while producing carbon-free power. The Cooper Nuclear Station is a leader economically, fiscally, environmentally and socially within Nebraska. 15 Page 366 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5003-000002 Owner: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Filename: image001.jpg Last Modified: Mon Jan 08 06:49:30 CST 2018 Page 367 of 408 image001.jpg for Printe em: 1260 3Nt Int 2 of 2) Document ID: 0.7.395.5204 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. To: EPC List Cc: Sanne, Brenda M. ; Becker, Mark C. ; Margheim, Scott A. ; Gentert, Brianna P. Bcc: Subject: Schieffer's Schedule Date: Sun Jan 07 2018 10:00:01 CST Attachments: Here is my schedule for this week: Monday – Travel to Cooper; PEDPs for Brianna Gentert and Mason Pelchat; LPPC Communications conference call; Travel home Tuesday – EPC Inventory Meeting; LPPC Communications Executive Working Group Conference Call; Direct Reports’ Meeting Wednesday - Scott Margheim PEDP; NEI Communications Webinar (tentative); NPPD Board Governance Committee Meeting; Thursday – NPPD Board Meeting Friday – Office; Mark Becker PEDP Jeanne Schieffer Corporate Communications & Public Relations Manager Nebraska Public Power District 1414 15th Street Page 369 of 408 Columbus, NE 68601 402.563.5990 402.910.2313 Page 370 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5203 From: Smith, Kimberly M. To: EPC List Cc: Spencer, Michael J. [Mick] ; Wiese, Arthur R. ; Kimball, David S. ; Dagerman, Joel L. ; Fehr, James R. ; Claborn, Mikel L. ; Rosenkranz, Jason D. ; Starzec, Donna K. ; Mueller, Staci S. Bcc: Subject: 01.09.18__8:00a EPC Mtg Material Date: Fri Jan 05 2018 15:32:01 CST Attachments: 8:00 a.m. Agenda/link for next Tuesday’s EPC meeting. Link will be updated Monday with items #1 and #6. Have a great weekend! EPC Sharepoint Site Link (Members Only) Executive Planning Council Meeting Tuesday, January 9, 2018 8:00-10:30 a.m. / Executive Conference Room https://nppd.zoom.us/j/393943814 use mic/speaker ZOOM 1 (415) 762-9988 / 393 943 814 Dave ‘for’ John System & Safety Status Report Nuclear Safety Culture Moment - McClure Discussion Items 1. 2017 Inventory Year-End Results – Kent / Dagerman (30) ~ 8:15a 2. Final Board Agenda Review – Pope / Modelski (15) ~ 8:45a Page 371 of 408 3. 10CFR50.80 Transfer of License – Kimball (15) ~ 9:00a 4. NEI Dues – Pope / Kimball (10) ~ 9:15a 5-min break 5. IRP Public Comments – Bender / Fehr / Claborn (20) ~ 9:30a 6. Rate Outlook Goal Setting – Bender / Rosenkranz / Starzec / Mueller – (30) ~ 9:50a 7. Staffing Statistics – Curry (5) ~ 10:20a The next Executive Planning Council meeting is at 8:30 a.m., Tuesday, January 16. Please forward agenda items ASAP and material to me no later than Noon, Friday January 12. Kim MW 6-368-5327 Page 372 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5177 From: Nuclear Energy Overview To: Kent, Thomas J. Cc: Bcc: Subject: Nuclear Energy Overview - January 4, 2018 Date: Fri Jan 05 2018 07:07:14 CST Attachments: **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Nuclear Energy Overview January 4, 2018 This week's top story — NEI: Efforts to Preserve Nuclear Energy Sources Paying Off As the United States enters a second week of record-breaking cold weather with a threatened repeat of the 2014 polar vortex that took many non-nuclear electricity sources offline, actions taken by states in the closing weeks of 2017 demonstrate that the reliability, resiliency and environmental attributes of nuclear generation sources are being recognized. In New Jersey, two committees of the state senate and assembly unanimously voted in favor of a bill to prevent the premature closure of New Jersey's vital nuclear assets. Meanwhile, the Georgia Public Service Commission unanimously approved allowing the continued construction of two AP1000 reactors at Georgia Power Co.'s Plant Vogtle. "Debate on both the New Jersey legislation and the Vogtle order underscored the key attributes of nuclear energy— resiliency, reliability, economic vitality and environmental necessity," NEI President and CEO Maria Korsnick said. Other Stories this week — None You can view Overview by clicking here. _____ Nuclear Energy Overview's daily news service provides the latest information on industry topics, legislation and more. For news as it happens, bookmark the NEO page and check frequently for new content. Or click for a roll-up of this week's stories in PDF format. Nuclear Energy Institute _____ Your questions, comments, suggestions or any additions to the mailing list are welcome. We can be reached at overview@nei.org. We look forward to hearing from you. Page 373 of 408 For more information, visit www.nei.org. Unsubscribe from these messages. twitter facebook You Tube RSS Flickr Blogger This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Page 374 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.34393 From: Dentlinger, Courtney A. To: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Cc: Bcc: Subject: RE: Extreme cold and electricity prices - a note from NEI Date: Tue Jan 02 2018 11:01:48 CST Attachments: Thanks for sharing this, Jeanne. Great perspective. From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2018 10:55 AM To: EPC List ; Corporate Communication/Government Affairs List ; Spencer, Michael J. [Mick] ; Thompson Jr., Ronald F. Subject: FW: Extreme cold and electricity prices - a note from NEI There was some discussion over natural gas prices this morning at the EPC. I thought you might be interested to read this message from the media relations director for the Nuclear Energy Institute about some pricing he is seeing in the eastern markets. From: KEELEY, John [mailto:jmk@nei.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2018 10:51 AM Subject: Extreme cold and electricity prices **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Obviously, it’s frigid outside. This is an extended period of extreme cold. In early 2014, a similar event shut down many electricity generators. Even without shutdowns, electricity prices are up very sharply, because demand is up, driven by electric heating requirements, and the price of natural gas is up too, because so much is being used for home heating, leaving less available for electricity generation. Page 375 of 408 Today, the first business day of the new year, prices were $180 a megawatt-hour in the mid-Atlantic region; on December 1 they were $27. New England’s electricity price today is $210; on December 1, it was $32. Nuclear power, which produces 20 percent of America’s electricity, moderates the price risk by providing bulk supplies whose cost is not affected by short-term fuel prices. It also provides insurance against fuel supply interruptions, because our fuel is in the reactor vessel, ready for use. Today, all 99 U.S. reactors are running – an incredible but unsurprising testament to nuclear’s reliability and its contribution to system resiliency. John Keeley Director, Media Relations Nuclear Energy Institute 1201 F St. N.W., Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 www.nei.org P: 202-739-8020 M: 202-730-5539 E: jmk@nei.org Follow NEI's media team on Twitter: http://twitter.com/NEI_media This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 376 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5136 From: Schieffer, Jeanne K. To: EPC List ; Corporate Communication/Government Affairs List ; Spencer, Michael J. [Mick] ; Thompson Jr., Ronald F. Cc: Bcc: Subject: FW: Extreme cold and electricity prices - a note from NEI Date: Tue Jan 02 2018 10:55:19 CST Attachments: There was some discussion over natural gas prices this morning at the EPC. I thought you might be interested to read this message from the media relations director for the Nuclear Energy Institute about some pricing he is seeing in the eastern markets. From: KEELEY, John [mailto:jmk@nei.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2018 10:51 AM Subject: Extreme cold and electricity prices **WARNING** This message originated outside of NPPD. DO NOT click on any links or attachments unless you have confirmed that it is from a trusted sender. _____ Obviously, it’s frigid outside. This is an extended period of extreme cold. In early 2014, a similar event shut down many electricity generators. Even without shutdowns, electricity prices are up very sharply, because demand is up, driven by electric heating requirements, and the price of natural gas is up too, because so much is being used for home heating, leaving less available for electricity generation. Today, the first business day of the new year, prices were $180 a megawatt-hour in the mid-Atlantic region; on December 1 they were $27. New England’s electricity price today is $210; on December 1, it was $32. Nuclear power, which produces 20 percent of America’s electricity, moderates the price risk by providing bulk supplies whose cost is not affected by short-term fuel prices. It also provides insurance against fuel supply interruptions, because our fuel is in the reactor vessel, ready for use. Page 377 of 408 Today, all 99 U.S. reactors are running – an incredible but unsurprising testament to nuclear’s reliability and its contribution to system resiliency. John Keeley Director, Media Relations Nuclear Energy Institute 1201 F St. N.W., Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 www.nei.org P: 202-739-8020 M: 202-730-5539 E: jmk@nei.org Follow NEI's media team on Twitter: http://twitter.com/NEI_media This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. _____ Sent through www.intermedia.com Page 378 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.5131 From: Smith, Kimberly M. To: EPC List Cc: Spencer, Michael J. [Mick] ; Wiese, Arthur R. ; Kimball, David S. ; Dagerman, Joel L. ; Porter, Karla J. ; Fehr, James R. ; Claborn, Mikel L. Bcc: Subject: 01.09.18_8:30a Prelim EPC Agenda / DUE 1/5 3p Date: Tue Jan 02 2018 09:22:51 CST Attachments: Agenda for next Tuesday’s EPC meeting. Material is needed by 3p, Friday, January 5. Thanks! Executive Planning Council Meeting Tuesday, January 9, 2018 8:30 a.m. / Executive Conference Room https://nppd.zoom.us/j/393943814 use mic/speaker ZOOM 1 (415) 762-9988 / 393 943 814 Dave ‘for’ John System & Safety Status Report Nuclear Safety Culture Moment - McClure Discussion Items 1. 2017 Inventory Year-End Results – Kent / Dagerman (30) ~ 8:45a 2. Final Board Agenda Review – Pope / Modelski (15) ~ 9:15a 3. 10CFR50.80 Transfer of License – Kimball (20) ~ 9:30a 4. NEI Dues – Kimball / Porter (10) ~ 9:50a 5. IRP Public Comments – Bender / Fehr / Claborn (20) ~ 10:05a 6. Staffing Statistics – Curry (5) ~ 10:25a The next Executive Planning Council meeting is at 8:30 a.m., Tuesday, January 16. Page 379 of 408 Please forward agenda items ASAP and material to me no later than Noon, Friday January 12. Kim MW 6-368-5327 Page 380 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.6609 From: None To: Steve Kerekes Cc: Bcc: Subject: RE: NEI Welcomes Senate's Approval of Fred Hochberg to Second Term at Ex-Im Bank Date: Attachments: From: Steve Kerekes [mailto:sck@nei.org] Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 3:46 PM To: McClure, John C. Subject: NEI Welcomes Senate's Approval of Fred Hochberg to Second Term at Ex-Im Bank see news release online FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE July 17, 2013 NEI Welcomes Senate's Approval of Fred Hochberg to Second Term at Ex-Im Bank WASHINGTON, D.C.—The U.S. Senate today approved the nomination of Fred Hochberg to a second term as chairman and president of the Export-Import Bank of the United States. Following is a statement from Richard Myers, the Nuclear Energy Institute's vice president for policy development, planning and supplier programs. "The nuclear energy industry congratulates Fred Hochberg on his confirmation and applauds the Senate for acting on this nomination. The confirmation of Chairman Hochberg ensures that the ExportImport Bank's board of directors will retain a quorum, enabling it to continue its important work without interruption. "Over the past four years, Chairman Hochberg has led the Ex-Im Bank during a time of unprecedented demand for export financing. Ex-Im Bank supported nearly $50 billion of U.S. exports in fiscal 2012, supporting more than 255,000 American jobs. Last year, the bank approved a $2 billion financing package for U.S. content in nuclear energy facilities under construction in the United Arab Emirates. The continued support of the bank will be essential as the U.S. nuclear energy industry looks ahead to new commercial opportunities. "American nuclear energy suppliers are competing in a highly competitive global market that is estimated at up to $750 billion over the next decade. Reliable access to export financing is vital to U.S. competitiveness. "Ex-Im Bank is an important, independent federal agency that helps create and maintain U.S. jobs by filling gaps in private export financing at no cost to American taxpayers. Over the past five years, Ex-Im Bank has earned $1.6 billion for U.S. taxpayers." ### Contact NEI's media relations staff at media@nei.org 202.739.8000 or 703.644.8805 Page 381 of 408 after hours and weekends. The Nuclear Energy Institute is the nuclear energy industry's policy organization. This news release and additional information about nuclear energy is available at www.nei.org. Copyright 2013 Nuclear Energy Institute. All rights reserved. To unsubscribe, click here . For more information, visit www.nei.org . Nuclear Energy Institute 1201 F Street N.W. Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 202.739.8000 This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Page 382 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.6176 From: None To: Pope, Patrick L. ; Bender, Traci L. ; Kent, Thomas J. Cc: Bcc: Subject: RE: Nuclear capacity payment Date: Attachments: I called NEI for some legislative background (what has been the discussion within NEI membership) and expect to hear from them this morning and will follow up with Entergy to see where they are on the issue. From: Pope, Patrick L. Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2016 8:21 AM To: McClure, John C.; Bender, Traci L.; Kent, Thomas J. Subject: RE: Nuclear capacity payment I like the idea but we should visit with our friends at Entergy to see if they have any planned initiatives in this area. Pat (402) 469-4436 – cell Where Did Your Federal Tax Dollars Go? Where Do Federal Energy Subsidies Go? From: McClure, John C. Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2016 8:40 AM To: Pope, Patrick L.; Bender, Traci L.; Kent, Thomas J. Subject: Nuclear capacity payment Last night as I was enjoying a bike ride and watching a bald eagle at Lake Babcock I had a thought about the challenges of current market prices and the role of nuclear power in a decarbonized energy economy. The federal government continues to increase its control over the generation of electricity through legislation, regulation and judicial decisions. States have less and less authority over this sector. The Nation is committed to participate in global carbon reduction, but the EPA finalized a regulatory policy and removed any credit for the largest source of carbon free generation from the regime— existing nuclear-- which provides the largest source of carbon free electricity and the only baseload source. Federal energy policy has promoted regional transmission development and regional electricity markets. Federal tax/energy policy has afforded wind and solar huge subsidies payments and created de facto preferences in regional energy markets for utility scale wind. Page 383 of 408 If the federal government wants regional energy markets and carbon free generation, we need federal legislation mandating a reasonable capacity payment for nuclear power plants operating in competitive wholesale markets. It does not add a new cost that doesn’t currently exist, but it distributes the cost more equitably and assures a reasonable compensation for a baseload, carbon free generation resource. Otherwise we are going to see more nuclear units shuttered which is contrary to the best long term interests for carbon reduction and grid reliability. I plan to visit with governmental affairs folks at NEI to see if they believe we could get traction with such an initiative. Maybe it has been pursued at the federal level and I am unaware of it, but fixing it on a state-by-state or RTO basis is not working. Thoughts? John Page 384 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.6405 From: None To: McFarland, Lisa M. Cc: Trave Bcc: Subject: RE: Out-of-State Travel Request For: McFarland, Lisa, Marie n/a Date: Attachments: From: McFarland, Lisa M. Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 1:46 PM To: McClure, John C. Cc: McFarland, Lisa M. Subject: Out-of-State Travel Request For: McFarland, Lisa, Marie n/a *Supervisors: You have received this message because an employee is requesting approval for out-ofstate travel. *Upon approval of this message please keep the previous employees in the message chain and forward the request on to the appropriate person. *Upon rejection of the request, simply reply to this message and notify employees of the decision that has been made. Travel Notification Traveler Name: McFarland, Lisa, Marie Date of Birth: 04/18/1976 Department & Location: Governmental Affairs/General Counsel CGO NPPD Extension: 55299 or 6-368-5299 Home Phone: 402-606-4397 E-mail: lmmcfar@nppd.com Trip Destination: Atlanta, GA Estimated Cost of Trip: $2,000 Purpose of Trip: Attend NEI Lawyer's Committee Meeting Travel Dates: 11/05/2013 - 11/07/2013 Rental Car Required?: no Lodging: Yet to be determined...once meeting location is finalized I will need two nights of hotel reservations. They are trying to get a group discount. Smoking Preference: nonsmoking Page 385 of 408 Conference Room Discount?: yes Name of Group & Discount Rate: NEI Lawyer's Committee Meeting Must Arrive at Destination Airport by: n/a Must Depart from Destination Airport After: 6:00 p.m. Desired Flight Schedule: Departure out of Omaha on 11/5/2013 OMA 2:10pm Layover in St. Louis STL 3:15pm Terminal 2 1h 5m 341 mi AirTran Airways 5424 Operated by Southwest Airlines Economy/Coach (E) BOEING 737-700 (WINGLETS) PASSENGER Layover: 3h 37m St. Louis STL 6:52pm Terminal 2 Atlanta ATL 9:20pm Terminal N 1h 28m 485 mi AirTran Airways 715 Economy/Coach (E) Boeing 717 Thu Nov/7/2013 Return 1 stop Total travel time : 4h 30m Atlanta ATL 6:30pm Terminal N Chicago MDW 7:35pm 2h 5m 600 mi AirTran Airways 167 Economy/Coach (E) Boeing 737-700 20 % on time Layover: 0h 50m Chicago MDW 8:25pm Omaha OMA 10:00pm 1h 35m 419 mi AirTran Airways 2434 Operated by Southwest Airlines Economy/Coach (E) Flight cost is approximately $345 Commercial Aircraft Seating Preference: Supervisor/Manager: John C. McClure Miscellaneous Comments: Page 386 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.6425 From: None To: Tom Stevens Cc: Bcc: Subject: RE: BWR Vent Order Implementation Workshop - Registration is Now Open Date: Attachments: image001.jpg image002.jpg image003.jpg image004.jpg image005.jpg image006.jpg image007.jpg image008.jpg image009.jpg ~WRD000.jpg Did you intend to send this to me or Tim McClure? From: Tom Stevens [mailto:trs@nei.org] Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 2:36 PM To: McClure, John C. Subject: BWR Vent Order Implementation Workshop - Registration is Now Open BWR Vent Order Implementation Workshop Royal Sonesta Harbor Court, Baltimore, MD November 12-14, 2013 NEI will host a reception Tuesday evening, November 12, 2013, 5:30-7 p.m. Hope to see you there. Registration is Now Open! NEI and the BWR Owners' Group are jointly sponsoring this workshop to roll out the implementation guidance for NRC Order EA-13-109, "Modify [Mark I and Mark II BWR] Licenses with Regard to Reliable Hardened Containment Vents Capable of Operation Under Severe Accident Conditions." The workshop will review the background of the order, including how it responds to lessons learned from the beyond design basis earthquake and tsunami events at Fukushima Daiichi in 2011. Who Should Attend? *BWR Mark I & II Nuclear Utility Fukushima Response Directors, Managers, and Engineers *Utility Executives with oversight responsibilities for Fukushima lessons-learned *Regulatory Directors, Managers and Staff with responsibilities to review licensee submittals *Contractors who will supply services and equipment as part of this implementation *Government/contractor regulatory and research experts involved in Fukushima lessons learned Hotel Informaton: Royal Sonesta Harbor Court Page 387 of 408 550 Light Street Baltimore, MD 21202 Hotel: 410.234.0550 Online Reservations Make your hotel reservations directly with the hotel and identify yourself as an attendee of NEI to secure the room rate of $159. Call 1.800.766.3782 (NEI's Group Code is: 1111NUCLEA). To guarantee a room at this rate, the reservation must be made by Oct. 22, 2013. After this date, the price and room availability are at the discretion of the hotel. _____ Your questions, comments, suggestions or any additions to the mailing list are welcome. We can be reached at conferences@nei.org. We look forward to hearing from you. _____ To unsubscribe, click here. For more information, visit www.nei.org. This electronic message transmission contains information from the Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee and its use by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or by electronic mail and permanently delete the original message. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Page 388 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.6425-000001 Owner: None Filename: image001.jpg Last Modified: Never modified Page 389 of 408 image001.jpg for Printed Item: 1272 Attachment 1 of 10) Page 390 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.6425-000002 Owner: None Filename: image002.jpg Last Modified: Never modified Page 391 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.6425-000003 Owner: None Filename: image003.jpg Last Modified: Never modified Page 393 of 408 image003.jpg for Printed Item: 1272 Attachment 3 of 10) Page 394 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.6425-000004 Owner: None Filename: image004.jpg Last Modified: Never modified Page 395 of 408 imageOO4.jpg for Printed Item: 1272 Attachment 4 of 10) Page 396 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.6425-000005 Owner: None Filename: image005.jpg Last Modified: Never modified Page 397 of 408 MB 1272 Document ID: 0.7.395.6425-000006 Owner: None Filename: image006.jpg Last Modified: Never modified Page 399 of 408 image006.jpg Printed Item: 12 Attachment 6 0? )0 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.6425-000007 Owner: None Filename: image007.jpg Last Modified: Never modified Page 401 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.6425-000008 Owner: None Filename: image008.jpg Last Modified: Never modified Page 403 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.6425-000009 Owner: None Filename: image009.jpg Last Modified: Never modified Page 405 of 408 Document ID: 0.7.395.6425-000010 Owner: None Filename: ~WRD000.jpg Last Modified: Never modified Page 407 of 408 ~WRD000.jpg Printed Item: 12 Attachment 1( 10) )8 of 408