ML19247A510
| ML19247A510 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 06/19/1979 |
| From: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Judith Weaver HOUSE OF REP. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7908010105 | |
| Download: ML19247A510 (2) | |
Text
k m
A-haascg\\')
UNITED STATES
=
[\\
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION m
3.g g
, C WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 e
c t w%
%...* f JUN 131975 The Honorable James Weaver United States House of Representatives Washington, D. C. 20515
Dear Congressman Weaver:
In response to your request at our recent hearing for information regarding the adequacy and the accuracy of the population dose assessment, I have again reviewed the report prepared by the Ad Hoc Population Assessment Group and have discussed the results with some of the authors. The following summarizes the information that I have obtained.
The individual dosimeter resu'ts generally agree with each other within a range of 35 percent (+35%). The results of the calibrated exposure by the National Bureau of Standards to sample dosimeters used in the TMI monitoring program were also within this range. This provides additional assurances that the dosimeter data does represent the actual radiation exposures that existed since these results were used to assess the collective population exposure.
For this purpose, particularly in view of the small individual exposures encountered, greater precision is not necessary.
The population dose assessr.ent itself was a detailed study and does, I believe, consider all of the available information as well as the assump-tions that were made in determining the population dose. The population dose estimate presented does not consider several factors which, if applied, would reduce the population dose. Therefore, the range of population dose (1600-5300 person rem) presented should encompass the maximum anticipated population dose as a result of the TMI accident.
I would also like to correct a statement made by my testimony to your com-mittee on June 4.
I stated that resumption of operation of Three Mile Island, Unit 1, was prohibited by Order.
I find that while issuance of an Order has received substantial consideration, in fact an Order has not been issued. We do have the licensee's commitment, reflected in a letter to me dated April 16, 1979, not to resume operation without providing us with substantial advance notice of its intention to start up. The time provided by such advance notice would enable the staff to review the in#ormation which we believe necessary E70 W]
I/ b
.U c os "8 N Zzzt
The Honorable James Weaver before we could approve resumption of operation. A meeting with the licensee was held on June 11 to discuss the action necessary '- resuming operation of Unit 1.
I am enclosing a copy of the population dose report for your information.
If I can be of any further service, please let me know.
Sincerely, critut : 'm by H. R. Dcrd:n Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
" Population Dose and Health Impact of the Accident at the Three Mile island NJclear Station"
's Q 7.-
t: ~0 L Li U