ML19224A949
| ML19224A949 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 04/30/1979 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| OLE-790430, NUDOCS 7906130271 | |
| Download: ML19224A949 (30) | |
Text
.
50-320 Dose Assessment documents prepared by Fuel Facilities & Materials
$afety Inspection Of'l,
IE 4/4/79 - 4/ 2/79 79061302Il 179 063 O
sx
N %{p h II'f$9 L
,I'b M,o y. t.. g _ }[_. i
,' i 1.. j.._. m
- / 4 q,w,n N.
I 3
I t
g
-l0 4.6 A h fup% fi% G g -vp-l 7y-9 ) o % - i _.. -._
...__kc1eu3_:__,
. g ' d,r d._! -
T4I.fuQtj,,q,_.!_._;yy8i3-c--].:..
I
_3
, A +,.5 c 1
.i _.
' h (..)!
i l
- i. _..hA4 tw.! h n l
^
__._.m
- r..
._,..I.._.._
l l
l
'i i
, ;. :(.. - {.....
I~
h
.a aA, i
, i 9,rr, i
i I
i i.2 45 f.M.
- _M..~ 64 I
I 1 6,6 g._i a 0.
(,.. -
- -l j
!1 ;IW 1~l$
ll,,-%0;L~lj r-j-47 'n
.._...A_
- a. 4. @em i i
l l p,,., o,sy
.....__.,R,,}.,:
I c gg, i
I i
..j.._..
l l
I _,,._.a, l
I l
f
'{
i e
._. 7 __
_g
!l1
- lh.k.(.lllNT1d l [ E-57-a_o.w L
l
^
t..
i'I j
l
[=,
I
~~ - P I O)
- % O <3 q
- .l -M_.7;q lp ;
i q,--Q:q o,ir i
i L-..,_...,
_..._..._p-
,3 p _.
il UaN
~
.,.)_i_.-
_.. =..
'l l
ri F-0 M l
i j u,1)J g 6 ) j p, j-( a %2;3 I
j i
i i~
l 1
O.ono
- }0 3 o -i l
i e.coooy 7.._.30]O[-
O,6 ql l %,3, 6 h. _,.,> _ r,r
-w O q
, _.]
i_.....
.,.. i..-
.. j __
-jo -@ o -(.! d D.co k I l l--~lG,11o i---h,_. t...I-[-
O Suo m I
i j
i p
i
' $- {. i ( t-i t H ( c. 1. 5 ;
i i...e % C )- 6 t ll 2
r rm.... o2 i
=-
1
_... i l
I I
l l
i u.. _.;
i i
l' l l
L i
I f
l l
I i
I i
I
.__.i-Li lA. /IA 6~l.._.
i i
_.y u -d !
lo !_ l I A I
- I l
!/ i _L I J
I/!
I i
a 2MAMMLN ! /Vah 61%!
J.M i h j d ~l (
l f
!~
- ' E l i
i I
i !ul t( @ i' E !
l I
I i
i i
i i
r l
- <r
- _. _ _((
r.,i;!
i i
- ao
__., _._4 g. _ ;._ _.l.
a 1
I
.~.
I I
i j
I I
t l
i i
l, i
__H _;
t._. ;
t---
l l
1 l
l l
l l
l l
i I
l l
t iI t
.1_._.i w-f i
I l
l l
t-l l _.. !
l
}
I i
I I
l I
I I
i i
II70in%j i
I
'l i
i i
t i
4 7; i
i i
._.-..i....
j g
t I
..d.,.,
- l. -
.e..-
3
- i c::e ROL' TING A80 TRAN5MITI SU;'
//
i
- / /,'
u m,m-em-,,- v.r:,,
...;.s. r.m NO / l
.t
,/;t-
,'F.sQ
._J.fL Snm.xek i= w 3 5 9,.
L. H k.cre H-238 T. Con 7 7/2.
1.
.f 4.
5.
.tet:n
}
F'.:e
!Nete a-d Return horoval For C:n rance
'Per C nversation
'As Requested For Correct on l
Prer.are Recty
_ Circufate For Ycur Information l lSee Me bomn ent Investigats I l Signature
!Coord nation Justify ll RT. MARKS f hC b42 W / b Q.
5' x
_ p clec/c u
on
/ M.Z' hta x.
h (ndivccla.a.I kal pula 7 an
~
H
.clo c-e
. 2.r x 4 4-to-79 y.
.n
.S..,'f..~.'..,.m ~. ?, m w.m-+
m. d. ~... y.7 3
- Q2 !:h,.~,0 'A v
u -
.G-M' J*& f,,Q'N.? &,,l.:f) M '.._. li,..'di~ ;: Q9 r
T
-Y.%i-l,' tN I"Ek; n@.$I..IS%.Y$y$[ N)5?&*. V
- G:-)^,6!
- T..-W.e,N
,e b nt;.4." '.
w.v*.
,35kh
[f.,$3f(.3'*5f$
ihS[
~
3r -
b~AD 5.h..
h',f m - :a.:
>.=, Eh.:
-[
'ik ; d. :1.- '~
'N y:.- 3. t a..,. w.a:n.;..-:.n..:n,a.r m. -,.., :., ~;a -
p- =.u.
..,, e.: y.y.,w.s.-g
,. p ;., ;. ~;.,,
1.<..,w.,j. g,.
cg a.. _..... ; 3..
e
. ~. >
.vr* e
. ? i.. -
e' 1%
.=
ah, concurrences, dispcsafs,-, -
w (d.N DO NOT use this form as. a, RECORD of approv..
g.
- ? ' # d. ! " clearances, and simitar. actions -
^
~ - - ', '..
e-
_,,;g.'...
Roo.a No.-Bldg.
-2 5.
FROM:(Nsme, org. symbof, Agency / Pest)
...a.-
L:f.p c. s>-
- 7 y
.,o-#
n... v.--. ;,.
r G,. t '
.-s y q,
t.j c_-
.,; c.g--
' 'E Phone No.'
D..d'.*.T o. nim.'W m.eI:,4
....,..s M ) _j nT~k h* ".,;]
k
%. c,# 5G41-Ic2 3 m,gy,. yy.,,,
, OFT 10NAL, FORM,41 (Rev. 7-76)
G/,3 t"v. f, >h q'so.3rr.-.2. 4
.- c e ?-.
2 rman.a e nsr.., - - m :,..,~
Ia s,... c'T... c ;isr M rsi'laE s554 D,t. D.t_ S. s.-. rru R (4 8 cFh. jo2,I.I.2,06 f'i.s.. ; t,.'. f,
f.
-^*
wkr. +) -lM. 9......'n D ;-c-- WM.... s.s,.:p:Kc;n=p3@p s'.Q yy w '&a-
~. @ '
a T. * ? '.
Ja3:.s a
'79 065 y
8
,1, 5 -
i
(-
4-//-7f
~
r.@rsc" -
1
, w [cs r.' ]
SUMMARY
OF POPULATI0fl DOSE,FOR TMI ACCIDENT 4
s_
3/28/79 - 4/5/79 o - So mites
.n ;1ative Period 0-10 Miles 10-50 :liles To th? -
_ " ur' 3/28 - 4/1 906 870 1,776 1,776 4/1
- 4/2 25 12 36 1,813 4/2 - 4/3 123
/o9) #
129(/3y)"
252 (2C)" 2,065 4/3 - 4/4 36 34 70 2,135 4/4 - 4/5 24 24 48 2,183
- 7?c t A/S-4,ff
+' /
39 50 2, 71 ~3
- 2 3 M WS
"/7 3
'I M0~ M 23
.2 /
W 239 2 2.400 g j 7 4,/g gjp,qg 7g I '/
3=
- Y-
= 2 'f 0 0 4/9-9/to
.27 39' 6l 2477 = zcco E
4 I
I i
t f
I I
/
gN
- I J
/
.I".'<!P(c. e,
'6 b y J pp
~
-q-y-77 Mr Accic:cd i
S u n,? ef kla.xinw.-r /-rdisiduo/ Z)ose (7LDhk)-
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~
E w VE
' O ccbon
- C ' ' ~*. ~ k.s.c=-ad : SS.M cu s five. Ti k /..
Peciod(tm) De=c (meem)
D :>:,< C,r-e m y
?/2' 8 - 3l27 W
W 3/' 29 - ?/3/:
.26 7/
3/st* 'f/'l.
f..(8.2.)'
7f-
~ (7 9..?.)
9/t 4/2.,..'--.
O'.(0,t)'"_.
79-(79 3) 9/2 - 4'/3
/. (c.59)"'
60-(n.E1)
^
/3
"/4 '
O, (:amf 82-07-s?)
50-l5:,c ?)
Y/9 - %/C-..
_./-7.(f.C)*
T b.
?_.--.
/#f~'f/*$)'
hse
$*d3.
~
v
~.
~ ~
- - ~
..f
.~-~~;..
.~
.. :~' ~ ~~ ;-
-J Y 77Mb/'s-l%='Kibci.;41t';.sa.
(d.is)._.:~~_.
~
~
1-2r_ (e.ag. er css.nL. ~ -_ _.
9/ s
< V p,-
~
v/9 --4/f' o._1..._f Aq G vi) '
.. 6%
(es.g2) _.
..z_
~
.. =.
p m"
.d
,..h
.w..S-w.-.-.*"a r,
.~..9 e.
w,
,y p...
..ge
.e_
- y. --:. : ~y. *. y L; ;h ;,', ~ 2_:7. ' :. %..;;- e ~ ' -.
=- '
K
..j
= - (.y :,.;; y _. ~_
~ ~
~
. ~
f
~
- .. g.'
- - =----
~.
-'...-gm.-
..#w.e
- ~.
~
o i
jf n'
'm
. Y I'A
' lfC* {t l h r>* $
f*
~
. ~f*o *, 5,Ik -
/
-mem + ee.
i..<nu w
_COE Environmental Deposition Measurements in the Area Surrounding the s
Three-Mile Island fluclear Power Station The DDE Region I Radiological As istance Team established three field laboratories for analyzing samples of ail, surface water, grass, and air for gamma-emitting radionuclides.
These laboratories were located at the Capitol City Airport.
Each utilized a sensitive, high efficiency lithium drifted germanium detector and nulti-channel gamma spectrum analyzer.
One set of each was brought in and manned by radiochemists from the Brookhaven flational Laboratory, Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory, and Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory.
Environmental samples were collected by crews from these laboratories with specific attention to areas near the plant, and within areas over which the plume of discharges from the plant had persis-ted, and were known to have touched down.
Attention was also given to assuring that if fallout had occurred, that the sampling method would be apt to pick it up; i.e., the soil, grass and water specimens were skimmed from the largest surface areas practiceble to fill Marinelli geometry con-tainers in order to increase the likelihood of detection.
The air samples were taken both by Silver-Gel filters flown into the plume, to ensure capture of any non-ionic radiciodine present, and charcoal filters were used in ground sampling large volumes of air in the plume.
The total numW of samples collected and analyzed starting on 3/29/79 has been in e/ cess of 800.
The detection sensitivity achieved (minimum detectable activity (MDA)) for Iodine-131 was at least one nanocurie per square meter for soil and grass,1 x 10-7 uc/ml for water, and 1 x 10-11 uc/ml for air.
Even lower MDA's were achieved on many samples by longer counting periods, by further idealizing of geometry, and when background radiation was lower.
The gamma spectrum measured for each sample was examined on its entirety to detect any photopeaks.
The detection sensitivity of this equipment was sufficient to reveal any uranium in the air at the allowable occupational concentra tions, if any had been present.
The analyses of these environmental samples revealed the presence of Iodine-131 in only a few air samples, and grass sampies, at barely over the detection limit, when extreme sensitivity was achieved by very long count times.
In a few soil samples, Cesium-137 radioactivity character-istic of world-wide bomb fallout levels was detected.
The Silver-gel air sample filters which had been flown through the plume, and the charcoal air sample filters used for the high volume ground level samples in the path of the plume, were returned to Brookhaven f;ational Laboratory for further analysis to de act the presence of pure beta, or alpha emitters by other techniques.
However, such species is afE considered entirely unlikely since the properties of the chemical species 6n which such radionuclides exist are known to promotg retention in their entirety within the reactor fuel and/or coolant, and Containment air g ;i; sampleion 3/30/79 did not reveal the presence of any such nuclides." a /uf 179 068 l
W/
79
x-r.
L Direct in-place measurements of radioactivity on the ground were also made by the DOE Environmental Monitoring Laboratory (EML) using two large volume, pressurized ionization chambers, and a very sensitive, high efficiency Lithium drifted Germanium detector gamma spectrometer.
These systems enable detection of variations in natural or mar.;de radioactivity of a fraction of a ricro roentgen per hour.
These van-mounted systems were deliberately moved to locations where those few environmental grass samples analyzed in the laboratory which indicated Iodine-131 at concentrations just above the MDA were taken.
These EML 3
measurements confirmed both the concentration measured in the laboratory, and the identification of the specific radionuclide as I-131.
Other measurements by the EML systems also confirmed the generally negative results found in the laboratory analyses of the environmental soil, water and grass samples.
The date, time, and specific lc cation of all of the environmental samples, as well as the results of the laboratory analyses are recorded in the Technical Work Record books of the DDE team, and copies of the data pages have been issued to the Pennsylvania State Department of Environmental Resources, EPA, FDA, and NRC.
The results of these analyses of the environmental samples, as well as gamma spectrum analyses of the plume made by the EML mobile system, support the conclusion that the predominant radionuclide in the airborne discharges was the inert gas Xe-133, with a small amount of Iodine-131 also present.
This conclusion is supported by information received from the NRC licensee (Metropolitan Edison) concerning the measured composition of stack discharge gases, and the analyses of the gas in the ccntainment.
i 1/a 069
d
&.A.w
_EQE Calculation of External Uhole Body Radiation Exposure to Population Around the Three-Mile Island (Tril) Nuclear Power Station Due to Radiation in Airborne Discharges The DOE assessment of the external whole body radiation exposure to the population around the Three-Mile Island (TMI) nuclear power station was performed by radiation physicists attached to the DOE Region I Radio-logical Assistance Program team.
The assessment was based on over 125 measurements of radiation taken on March 28, 1979, through April 3,1979, in the center of the plume of airborne discharges.
These measurements were taken from helicopters, using Geiger-Mueller survey instruments with prubes having open, low density windows, to enable measurements of dose contribution from high energy beta radiation.
The radiation survey probe was held external to the heliccpter(s) to minimize attentuation of any radiation.
The measurements were made at various distances out to tro miles from the TMI plant.
At each distance, the helicopter (s) were maneuvered to find the maximum radiation dose rate, and only this maximum value was used in the calculation of population dose within any sector.
The geographical region within a 50-mile radius of the plant was plotted out in concentric and azimuthal sectors, and the population exposure within each sector was calculated based on (a) the measured radiation dose rates, (b) records of the helicopter location for each measurement, (c) the path of the plume, and the duration of its passage, as well as predictions of its course and speed from meteorological data provided by the DOE Atmospheric Release Advisory Service, and (d) population figures for each sector projected for the 1980 census (slightly higher than present figures.) Also assumed was (e) a factor of two reduction $
in radiation dose to an individual at ground level due to gecmetry and (f) members of the population were out of doors during the entire dura-tion of passage of the plume, and did not benefit from the shielding af forded by being in doors.
The dose rates at distances beyond ten miles from the plant were extrapo-lated from the plotted curve of radiation measured as a function of distance within ten miles of the plant.
The calculated combined population exposure to external radiation within the 50-mile radius using the above data and assumptions was 1700 man-rems
+ 420 man-rems, and the maximum exposure to any person would have been 95 millirem to a hypothetical individual located three-tenths of a mile for the entire week following the TMI occurrence.
The average exposure to the 2,165,651 persons within the area considered would be about 1 millirem, or about 1% of the yearly exposure due to natural radiation.
s N
\\
2
.V
- =b
. This. assessment overestimates the actual exposure because of the following conservative assumptions:
(a) During that part o'f the time when the population was indoors, the gamma radiation would be significantly reduced by the shielding effects of buildings, and beta radiation would have been mostly excluded.
~
(b) Many of the helicopter flights and radiation dose measure-ments were made in response to known increases in discharges from the plant.
Therefore, they would be higher than average values, and would weigt.t the exposure rate higher than average.
(c) The maximum doses measured in the plume were applied to the -
entire sector affected.
A comparison of the DOE and NRC assessments indicates that comparable population, and individual exposures are estimated.
t 179 07i m
M em e m e
.m m
= ee
1?-
!!!I:!
't NAXIMUfLRADIATI0ILLEVELS (BElfbbMA)
ROUTE 11111, OBSERVATION CENTER 3
ROUTE 283 NEAR llARRISBURG
.3 GROUND LEVEL IN PLUME 15 GROUND LEVEL OUTSIDE PLUME 1
Il0RTil GATE OF PLANT 70 AERIAL SURVEY, IG MILES NORTil
.1 MARCll 29 SITE BOUNDARY 50 AERIAL SURVEY, 1 MILE
.5 0FFSITE, GROUND LEVEL MAXINUM FOR LESS TilAil 1 IIR 30 7
GENERAL AREAS FOR DAY 1
so N
N
1 w
3 LMXIMUILRADIAT.I0fLLEVELS MR/IIR (BETA GAMMA)
LiARQi30.
AERIAL SURVEY OVER SITE 8 - 10 NEAR SITE 6-8 BEY 0flD 5 TO 6 MILES NOT DETECTED MallGL31 AERIAL SURVEYS, 1 MILE 1.5 - 2.5 AERIAL SURVEYS, 10 MILES
.1
. 2 0FFSITE GROUND LEVEL, 1/2 MILE 2
T, x
w a
n:
1-wu fnli:i!!gm!!!
lii;:n :n
. ign ui n.:
u.
'l MAX 1HUfLilADIAT10!LLEVELS.
APRll 1 (B
A AHMA)
AERIAL SURVEY, 1 MILE 2
AERIAL SURVEY, 10 MILES
.15 GROUND LEVEL, 2 - 3 MILES
.06 GROUND LEVEL, 500 YDS. EAST 3
APRIL 2 AERIAL SURVEY, 1 MILE 3
AERIAL SURVEY, 3 MILES
.1
.5 GROUND LEVEL OFFSITE
.01
.0ft (BRIEF PERIOD) 1.5 APRIL 3 AERIAL SURVEY, 1 MILE 2
AERIAL SURVEY, 3 MILES 1.2
}
GROUND LEVEL 0FFSITE
.01
.02 (BRIEF PERIOD)
.5 o
2 i
u!!c
,e an i
- ih '
, i o. ";
u!,mu SilMMARY OF SAMPLil1G AND ANALYSIS (AS OF APRIL 23)
'> 160 0FFSITE WATER SAMPLES il 'li t i
'i,;
es 520 0FFSITE AIR SAMPLES
> 315 (IILK SAMPLES
^' 260 0FFSITE VEGETATION SAMPLES
^> 220 0FFSITE Soll SAMPLES
<J 850 TLD PROCESSED LICENSEE, NRC, DOE, EPA, ilEW (FDA), COMMONWEATil 0F PENNSYLVANIA i
wO CD il i I!
l (JT l.
li
ifll%
i
a:
no wmiu e.
RANGES OF AND SOME HAXIMUM RADIATI0ll MEASUREMENTS Ill 0FFSITE AREAS a
GROUND AERIAL AIR SAMPLE TLD MILK VEGETAllull DATE (MR/llR)
(MR/IIR)
(UC1/CC)
(MR/llR)
(PCl/L)
(l'C1/Su 10 APR ll
. 0 1. 011 1,2 10-10
.01.07 12-18 APR 5-
.01.15
.3
.02.05 APR 6
.01.1
.05.3 10-13
.01.03 12 APR 7
.01 1
.0ft.05 21 APR 8
.01.1
.03-1.0 10-12
.02 02 APR 9
.02 2
1-2
.02.05 APR 10
.02.12
.1.15 10-12
.02.03 10 APR 11
.01.1
.02.03 10-12
.01.02 90 APR 12
.01.02
.01.03 10-12
.01.02 59, 260 (2)
APR -13
.01 02
.01.03 10-12
.01.02 G
APR i
.01 02
. 0 1. 011 10-12' 401 02 he/60 APR 1
.01 02
.01.013 10-12
.01.02 APR 16
.01.02
. 0 3. 011 10-11
.01.02 ll o 4 3 o
I!
- ei lli! lllihilIil
!!=
m.s
!!ni!!!!hi!":H
,;i..
9 RANGES OF AND SOME IIAXIfiUM RADIATION f1EASUREf1EilTS IN OFFSITE AREAS I
/
GROUf1D AERIAL AIR SAMPLE TLD MILK VIGLIAI10fl DATE (MR/llR)
(MR/llR)
(UEI/CC)
(MR/IIR)
(PEl/L)
(r[l/SU M) l APR 17
.01.02 10-10
.01.02
.AM' G13 APR 18
.01.02
.01 02 10-11
.01.02 J2SfM 550 APR 19
.01.02
.01 10-12
.01 02 AeR 20
.01.02
.01 10-12
.01.02 APR.21
.01.02 10-12
.01.02 MDA APR 22
.01 02 Mon
.01.02 APR 23
.01.02 BKG MDA
.01.02 APR 2ff'
.01.02 BKG MDA
.01 02 MDA APR 25
.01 02 MoA
.01.02 MDA MDA APR 26
.01.02 Mon
.01 02 APR 27 L-.01.35
.01.2 noA
.01.02 x.
APR 28
.01 02 nxo Mon
.01.02 c2 APR'29 Z.01' 02 IlKG '
MDA.
.01.02
//0 10-U
.01.02 32 APR 30
.011.02 aKo
'.c
.e.
se L
M t-
'e u
aw C
~
w C
sv a
wa c:
a c
o
=
-r r
a i
s*
u o
w c:
=
w e
C e
o c:
N w
c m
a m
w
=
o s
r m
en
=
a t--
o w
c:
m x=
z w
w w
a e
c:
w o
=
=
=
a os e
m v
o r
H w
c.
J l
__ a x
x w
~
w w
a N
H Z
H e
u.
=
=
o D
H o
c:
r u.
e r
o u
c:
x o o sv c: a
[
r L.
L9 r
m 6
o l
Ne I
eo i
se Mo N
e No Ne 1
-o N
Z 7
h h
~
_t i
m m
1l5 N78 on Nm c,
m W
H o
Un0H 83d SN391N3081TlIW
W H
CC ed t
f.n 1
J W
u.
H O
C:
I C.
O U.
O
<~
D C
D Q
O 2
Q
~
~
H-Q D
O Z
-)
C C
1 O
'D ed H
O C
W U
]
O
-J C
C C
H-O 2 E
ed E
c L; J CN C.
E C
LL O
H N
m
<~
O O
=
C
~
C.o 1
f.O W
t J
)
J W
O t
O C
C:
p W
H
)
i W
O O
H Z
Q J
7 W
W H
E LL 3ll C
~
W P---
Z O
O O
N O
W I
"O O
y)
U)
O U
H f/)
U H
Z W
f.a U
C U)
~-
J O
C.
H O
O E
O Z
O O
W W
O O
Q C.
E W
W W
L: !
Z C
U W
.J
_J O
Z W
O O
N O
=
O Z
."C" F--
l2" 3
_j u.
O H
Z u) g y
p W
Q u)
_J C3 W
D E
u)
H v)
O W
W g
g a
g
.Ti.,'To.a""':
-e.--.me.
.me eu e.
..e-.aw.+4 4-.,.
es.e.,,
..-*.-.----..em
..-we...
ll!y % glllla
- I E!!::l j g!i
~ /, '
I PERS0lllEL EXPOS!!RES - LICE;lSEE C01 TRACTOR (TilROUGli APRIL 26)
Wil0LE BODY GAMf1A DOSE DOSE RAf1GE - MILLIREM NUMBER lll R A f4 G E 100 -
250 157 251 -
500 76 501 -
750 lll 751 - 1000 0
1001 - 2000 2
2001 - 3000 0
3001 11000 3
>11000 0
sO C3 CG CD
H:i h-
+
1:
p llo nW;c
.g-
!jti:._2.
- n !!!! n.
f.
1 PERS0llNEL EXPOSURES - IIRC (TilROUGli APRit 30)
Wil0LE BODY GAMMA DOSE DOSE RANGE - MILLIREM NUMBER IN RANGE
( 10 205 11 - 100 27 101 - 250 15 251 - 500 1
501 - 750 5
751 - 1000 2
> 2000 0
w.
W CD OD
ll*
4 ui!"inlli!!jun I
!!J!i b m
!!ciiclim ik
/.
0,'4 SITE RADIAT10!1 LEVELS AT GROUdD LLVEL DATE T If1E LOCAT10N MR/IIR f1AR 23 0330 SITE BOUIJDARY l
0900 SITE BOUflDARY
.1 1057 EAST SIDE OF ISLAf1D 7
1350 fl0RTil PARKIf1G LOT--ISLAtlD 15 1620 NORTH GATE 70 1923 SITE BOUNDARY 3
MAR 29 0050 NORTil GATE 3.5 Ull2S NOF.Til GATE 27 1015 EAST RIVER BAf1K--ISLAND 10 11150 NORTil END OF ISLAND
.1 1650 tl0RTil PARKil1G LOT--ISLAtJD 1
18f15 ONSITE 1.8
.1 so O
CD N
!!!i
!!1lInll[ !!!j$ifJ; llHi J
ii:...
- llo ipN,
ll ONSITE RADIAlI0N REA0irlGS AT GROUilD LEVEL DATE T it1E LOCAT10ft f1R/liR T1AR 30 OtJS I TE 55 FIAR 31 Of1 SITE 35 APR 1 Ot1 SITE II APR 2 OrlSITE 7
APR 3 OtisITE 2.5 APR ll Of1 SITE
.b APR 5 OflSITE
.7 APR 6 OilSITE
.1
-y su
'2 CD LN
-- y g
g e
1 3;ldsdYe w; ' p, i
l O
O O
O m
r O
dp M
N M
j
/p l
- E /
- 4 s %
s O
O O
O m
m
?%
V
+
s ll h
Q e
~
~
O O O
O Og, O O GR O O Y
M N M
L9 e-1 60 S75 O
O O
O O
O O
m e-i e-+
l d'
O l
c,3 v o
+
O
" gl M
e-t O
O O O
O
=cl O
O O O
O p
V N m N
m m O O
O
=,
m l
~C
/p
/
s n s n$ sl/)
l
/
O O
u_
,,e
-'Q O
O
</Jp m
e-1 C
L9 e-f g,
r-D S,
t O
l Y)
O
\\
c's,^#
O, 4
e
_.J O 7 O
O C
E O O O
O
-J y
um o en N
I C
L.J O >
c,a e
uj
.c.;
g
- Z-- ':--.
L.)
J u.J
= cc
^
J CQ N u) v)
in O
rA e
c N
A N
C N
5
~~~
O O w
< N I
I J O J LA
_J H
U U
~
O e-1
<C J
c c
e is e to c
H ct O c
e-t c_
a O ><
~~-
C
< D C
<C
<C
~
<C D
~
.am.
+
-ll-;
- g. n.
f yue
.w RADIATIOU LEVELS : ROENIGEllS PER ll0UR AUXILIARY BUILDING Ulle.T #2, 281' LEVEL
[&
T&
F" 3&
Seit uk9; i
&u
$ O 'g'm ha
- 4i!
G<n 8
4
[I l?!= a ';$
N qi 0
~,
!? ho Gi!?S' s) a gi?$
L?Sllu?
J<' yE E
'?
., n.
a:
n>
FIARc.i 23
<.001
<. 001
<.001
<.001 f1 A R Cil 3.1 25
.5 APRIL 1 25 2
.5 300 APRIL 3 2
. li
> 1000 APRIL fl
>100 50 APR L 6
>100 50 11
> 1000 y
C CO En t
'!I
,.i
?!!
- i l
i
~
l RECOVERY PilASE EtiV I R0fitlET1 T AL l-10!11 TOR I f1G IIAY 1, 1979 l
Tl D G
AGENCY E00D (11LK WAIER AIR SIM10 tis s'10lr[i(,S
.By EPA Il-7/DA 2-3/WK 31/DA 11'}
FDA 20/WK 30hiK 235 f1RC II/DA 5-10/DA Il7 DAILY PLAtlT I/DA Il I
STATE GRAB DISCilARGE CONTINUOUS DOE:
AERIAL SURVEY TEAM ON STAtlDBY llCENSEE:
NORMAL PROGRAMJ INCREASED FREQUENCIES OF MEASUREMEllTS CO
h f
m o-LIST OF COLOR FILL 1 SLIDES (WILL NOI REPRODUCE IlY XEROX)
AERIAL VIEW 0F lilREE f11LE ISLAt1D fIAP S!!0 WING LOCAT10il 0F DIRECT RADIATIO!1 MEASURU1ENT AND IODINE AIR SAf1PLI!1G MAP Sil0WIl1G LOCATION OF TLD STAT 10ilS OF VARIOUS AGEllCIES f1AP Sil0 WING PLUME OUTLlllE AilD AERIAL RADIATION MEASUREf1ENTS ON MARCll 30 MAP Sil0 WING ESTIMATED EXTERNAL EXPOSURE FOR FIRST WEEK 8
~
POPULATION DOSE ESTIKATES During the week of April 1, a joint NRC/ HEW / EPA ad-hoc study group agreed on the methodology to be used in estimating the radiation dose received by the population within a fifty (50) mile radius of the site.
In addition, the study group calculated the initial dose estimates up to April 4.
Using the agreed upon methodology, as of noon April 8, the NRC has estimated the total population dose within a f'fty mile radius to be 2400 man-rem.
There are approximately 2 million people living within the fifty mile radius of the site.
Thus, the radiation dose to an average member of the population is estimated to be in the range of 1-2 millirem.
It is estimated that the maximum radiation dose received offsite by a ember of the public is less than 100 millirem (--85 nillirem is the current best estimate).
This individual would have had to be continuously present out-of-doors at the site boundary approximately 0.7 miles northeast of the reactor, which is the point at which the higher radiation dose rates were measured.
l PRELIMINARY EVALUATION OF HEALTH EFFECTS OF THE THREE MILE ISLAND INCIDENT Radiation monitoring indicates that the exposure of the general popula-tion in the immediate vicinity of the plant was well within the limits of NRC regulations (10 CFR Part 20) for annual doses to members of the general populations.
They did exceed the numerical design cbjectives for normal reactor cperation of 5 millirem per year (Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50).
The sources of exposure were radioactive gases (xenon, krypton and iodine) that leaked from the plant - primarily from the auxiliary building.
Radio-active iodine (I-131) would be of particular concern because of 4ts concen-tration in food, particularly in milk.
However, as of April 3,1979, it appears that no more than 3.0 curies of radiciodine were released.
Iodine levels observed in milk samples are less than one-tenth of those observed in milk following the Chinese nuclear tests in the fall of 1977.
The predomi-nant radioactivity released from Three Mile Island was the noble gas Xenon-133.
The NRC has estimated that as of April 5, 1979, approximately 10 million curies of Xe-133 were released.
An independent estimate of Xe-133 releases by Lawrence Livermore Laboratory is 14 to 34 million curies, thus bot'
.ti-mates are in agreement considering the extent of the uncertainty in the estimates.
An ad-hoc dose assessment group of representatives from NRC, EPA and HEW have made estimates of the radiation doses to the population around the Three Mile Island plant, based primarily on monitoring of offsite areas 179 08'/
j
2
~ -
by thermoluminescent dosimeters.
The calculated, total cumulative, 50-mile radius population dose from March 28 to April 8,* was approximately 2400 man-rems, which is equivalent to an average dose to individuals of 1.1 millirems.
The maximum dose to an individual offsite (hypothetical individual continuously present out-of-doors at a location 0.7 miles NE of the plant) is still estimated to be less than 100 millirems (85 millirem).
This is within the dose limits reccmmended by the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements I
for annual doses to a member of the general public (170 millirem per year).
These estimates are whole body gamma doses resulting primarily from the relatively weak gamma radiation frcm Xenon-133 (80 kev).
The health impact of the estimate of maximum individual dose for a nypothetical individual exposed out-of-doors for entire duration at loca-tion of hignest measured offsite dose can be considered in terms of the acde_ -isk of a fatal cancer.
The existing lifetime risk of fatal cancer is approximately one-eighth (0.12).
The estimated risk from natural back-ground is approximately one to two percent of this value (0.0017).
The added risk delivered to the hypothetical individual would be 0.16% (0.000019) of the existing risk of a cancer death or about one percent of the estimated risk from natural radiation (1.1%).
The potential health impact of the es timated population dose including fatal and non-fatal cancers and genetic effects to all future generations is 1.3 health effects; and the number of potential fatal cancers over the lifetime of the population is 0.45.
This can be compared to the existing cancer death rate of 4,500 per year and "From ;pr:; 4:n on, these values have been useater ey memcers of the NRC Staff, 179 09U
-m..
-h
.M%Amsd, m.
wG g.
- g. M f ew
- g
..W
+ma 3 h 3 Mgg
,,.,g,%_
gm p
3 l--
the estimated incidence from natural background radiation (125 millirem per year) of 54 per year.
This supports the concitsian that the accident
~ " ~
will not produce any detectable cancers within the lifetime of all of the residents in the area.
1/9 091
~,s Tt.e maximum dose an individual wouid receive from drinking the water containing the highest. measured I-131 concentration is 9.3 millirem per year.
This assumes an infant drinks this water for an entire year.
The average of the measured concentrations is a factor of ten smaller than the highest measured concentration.
Thus, the dose to the average individual is a factor of ten less than the maximum dose.
179 Oh
-