ML19248C595
| ML19248C595 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/18/1979 |
| From: | Bradford P, Gilinsky V, Kennedy R NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 7907030413 | |
| Download: ML19248C595 (75) | |
Text
,
3,,q,1 j 4
a a*4...
i u n d W J.4.se q
1
- 2: ":0 L c, -......
'e
.F NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF:
PLH.IC. M ING RGICAN A'ICMICS PIRC SHUIDOW (ARIzCts)
Place. Washington, D. C.
Dcte -
Monday, la June 1979 Pages 1-74 r i.ew.:
c:c:: w -37:c i
ACE - FEDERAL REPORTERS,INC.
OfficialReporters 2 8 2 0 '1 3 444 Ner8 c=eiteistreer Wcshington D.C. 20001 NATIONWICE COVERAGE DAILY ~[QU/('['3(',([/h
3 CR5451 DISCLAIMER This is an unc fiicial transcript of a meeting of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission held on yedav, 19 Jee 19 9 in the.
Commissions's offices at 1717 H Street, N.
N., Washington, D.
C.
The meeting was open to public attendance and observation.
This transcript:
has not been reviewed, corrected, or edited, and it may contain
(
inaccuracles.
~
The transcript is intended solely for general informatio.nal purposes.
As provided by 10 CFR 9.103, it is not part of the formal i
or informal record of decision of the matters discussed.
Expressions of opinion in this transcript do not necessarily reflect final determinations or beliefs.
No pleading or other paper may be filed with the Cc= mission in any proceeding as the result of or addressed to any statement or argument contained herein, except as the Cc= mission may authorize.
I 6
282 099
2 3
i l
1l UNITED STATES OF AMERICA i
CR5451 l
I i
NCCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2'
i 3
l PUBLIC MEETING I
4 AMERICAN ATOMICS PLANT SHUTDOWN (ARIZONA) l 5,.
i 6'
I 7l l
l l
t I
i Bl Room 1130 9
17I7 H Street, N.
W.
i e
i 10 l Washington, D.
C.
f Monday, 18 June 1979 j; !
I The Commission met, pursuant to notice, at 3:00 p.m.
12 l
l BEFORE :
13 i
VICTOR GILINSKY, Commissioner (p residing. )
l g
1 RICHARD T. KENNEDY, Commissioner 15,
i R A. 3RADFORD, Commissioner 16 JOHN F.
AHEARNE, Commissioner 77 18 39 1 Messrs. Chilk, Gessick, Ryan, Kerr, Shapar, Dircks, and h
Bassin.
.l 20 J l
21 22 '
23 24
..;.w i Recorms inc.
't 00 c_g q
i 23
~
a
CR 5 4 51-l OPEN MIKE !'
3 i
i 6/18/79 i
!I;
_P _R O_ _C _E.E D _I N_ _G _S 2.,1 t
2l (3:00 p.m.)
3l COMMISSIONER GILINSKY (presiding) :
Lee, could i
1 4
vcu start?
j l,
S' MR. GOSSICK:
All right, I think I'll ask i
l 6'
Mr. Ryan to sort of lead off the subject.
Wayne Kerr has 7i just returned over the weekend from being out there where j
i B
this matter is going on in Arizona, but Bob, why don't you i
I, 9,
go ahead with the background.
l i
10 COMMISSIONER JILINSKY:
Could I just say a word i
here?
I hope that we'll cover both the health and safety l
Il 12 :
problem and the recant historv of NRC's involvement.
I l
i 13 !
understand there have been discussions with them, and as l
14 you said, Wayne Kerr has just returned from Arizona.
o
!l 15 '!
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Can we sort of start from i
16 ground zero?
a 17 !l MR. GOSSICK:
Start from the beginning, right.
a 13,
MR. RYAN:
Okay, the first time I heard of a problem with tritium at this facility, which is licensed
.O l j
under the Agreements State by the State of Arizona, was l
i on the 2 3 th o f Feb ruarv last when Conmissioner Kennedy 2nd a
1 "i
ee his staff were in that region for a speech on a completely a,
unrelated matter -- I believe it was on high-level waste --
e, and as I recall, Commissioner Kennedy, your staff, cr you 7,eerai a.coners. inc.
- r
- c. e rsonally, were ac.croached bv. s o m.e n.,e w s c.,a c e r r e s. c r e e r s - -
L i
s e
4 2 jgb t
1 i
1 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I was, i
i 2i MR. RYAN:
You were, personally, j
D]
3l
-- who alleged that there were occupational i
4, overexposures taking place within the plant, American I
I 5'
Atomics.
There had been some newspaper coverage of it.
l i
t 6'
Your man, Stevens, told me on the 2 8th --
i 7;
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Stevens?
Or Gibert?
i I
al MR. RYAN:
Gibert, excuse me.
I 9!
And we contacted Arizona the same day.
We 1
4 10 '
received subsequently a copy of an enforcement letter which i
11 '
the Arizona Atomic Energy Commission had issued to the i
12 !
facility dated the 9th of March, 1979, and we've had a l
i i
j l
13 number of discussions with the --
14 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
What was the nature of that I
15 y enforcement letter?
16 i MR. RYAN:
The enforcement letter said a number 17 i o f things.
Let's see if I can spell them out in some i
18 ]I detail.
i 19 !
It's headed " Notice of Violation" --
20,
CCMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Let me say that, at the a
21 same time that I called you, I made the Arizona -- the I
22 :,
Executive Director of the Arincna Atomic Energy Ccmmission --
23 MR. RYAN:
Mr. Den Gilbert, right.
24 "
CCMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
That's right, Don Gilbert, 1 Eedef a' RfDOrter$, INC.,, '
., Onat ne was aware a:-
aware of this concern.
nnc ne sal:
282 102
3 jvb 5
l 1
i 1
some di::1culties and was looxing into it.
2 MR. RYAN:
Right.
Mr. Don Gilbert has subsec.uentiv.
1 3
left the Arizona Atomic Energy Commission.
i i
i 4
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Very shortly thereafter.
5l MR. RYAN:
I think he was in the process of I
6 leaving even while you were out there.
That's my understanding l
7:
at any rate.
i.
8;
" Notice of Violation, dated March 30, 1979:
i 9
The licensee is not operating in compliance with the i
10 Arizona Atomic Energy Commission Regulation R-121 407 (a),
f I
11 '
in that it has been discharging and will have discharged en 12 '
a one-year average for the period of time April 1,
- 1978, through March 31, 1979, to an unrestricted area the radio-I3 i
I#
active material hydrogen 3, in the air in concentrations I
1 *(
which exceed the limits specified in that section.
4 16 "It is therefore directed that the licensee, l
I7 q American Atomics, demonstrate sufficient control cver this 1
I3 racloactive material to comply with that section."
o i
19 '
The Arisena regulation defines " restricted area"
,0 ',
as "any area access to which is controllad."
r 21 Accordingly, the werk rooms are the restricted
, I area.
The inspectors reported that they drove onto the property, parked their vehicle and approached the building with no centrol being exercised.
.: =m:., s ewnm. s ne.,
SC At the same time -- at the time of the inspecticn,
- ~
282 103
4 jTo 6
l i
l the licensee possessed approximatelv 370,000 curies of 1 ll 9
hy : ge 3, which is in excess of the license possession 2 I I
J limit.
Some of the license itemt -- and they cite the 3
license paragraphs -- which items individually specify 3
r max mum quan y
.a
.e ensee may possess at any ote j
5 i
time in certain specified chemical or physical forms, allows 6
only a maximum total of 285,510 curies.
l 7
l l
"The Arizona Atomic Energy commission is in i
3 I
t receipt of a request for license amendment from American 9
i Atomics to increase possession limits, and this will 10 1
11 ;
receive i==ediate attention as soon as the licensee has 12 l demonstrated adequate accountability for hydrogen 3.
"Because of the existing excess, the licensee is j
(
13 not in compliance with the Arizona Atomic Energy Commission ja regulation number specified and the conditions specified in j3 the license.
16 l "3.
The licensee's stack moni Oring ecuiement is, 1,,.
'l and accarentiv has been for sometime insufficiently sensitive l o-i 1
to detect, measure, and record H-concentrations in the 39 J
s ck at and below the maximum permissible concentration 20,
level.
This is in violation of the license.
,)
t, "The licensee has, since July 1978, added an
,,],
additional type of stack monitoring equipment.
The adequacy
,3 of the licensee's new equipment has nct been demonstrated.
3
,3, cues n econm. s ee..
The licensee is directed :c demonstratc adequate detection n.c i i
282 104
/
,5 jwb I
I capability of the stack monitoring equipment.
t 2
"4.
The accountability of hydrogen 3 in the 3,
tegcry 'of normal operational losses ' appears excessive f
4 and such general categorization is unacceptable.
This is j
I 5
not in compliance with R-1.2-1-109, which requires ' records i
6 showing the receipt, transfer, and disposal of all sources.'"
71 They are thereaf ter required to respond within 8'
30 days indicating both the directions contained in this t
i 9
report have been adhered to, and that all items have been 10 '
brought into compliance.
11 i "If you fail to either comply or respond, you i
12 wil1 be in violation of law and the Commi,ssion regulations,"
l 13 and they cite the sectiuns.
14 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
When did they inspect that 15 '
facility?
16 MR. RYAN:
There was an inspection of that 17 facility --
18 MR. GOSSICK:
Last night.
19 l MR. RYAN:
Well, let's go back.
An inspection was l
2C conducted August 17th, 1973.
Four violations, including 21 l one related to inventory losses, was noted.
There was a l
22 1 reinspection on March 9th, 1979.
Four viciations, 22 including excessive releases, and =cre material on hand than authorized.
,4 c.,ai neoorms ice. J 25 There was another investiga:icn cn May 7th, 1979.
0,nb 9
9 1
L c
a
6 jwb 8
I i
1l It disclosed the licensee received more material and i
2l inventorv continued in excess of the authorization.
I l
3i That's basically -- there have been subsequent l
I e
4l visits to the facility since that time by the Arl ena i
5 Atomic Energy Commission.
l l
i 6!
The matter came something to a head on --
i 7l COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Could you say something i
I 1
3 abo ut the hazard that's involved there?
i j
9!
MR. RYAN:
Sure.
I'll leave that to our health 6
10 physics expert, if I may, but I think the general proposition 11 j from which we work is that tritium is nct good for you, and i
i 12 '
it shculd not be found in the quantities that it is found i
13 off-site if the process at the plant is properly working.
14 We'll go through the numbers for you in a minute.
15,
But let me say that the matter came to a head --
16 i COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Excuse me, Bob, to clarify 17 this for my own thinking, you said in August 1973 they had q
a 18!
done an inspection, and at that time did they find significan:
,\\
4 i
im releases c:. triti=n occurrinc?
t '
i 20 l MR. RYAN:
I don't believe they found significan:
21 l releases.
I 22 Wayne, can you help me on that?
The Augus: '73 --
22 MR. KERR:
There were three that are generally 24 considered sc=ewhat mincr-tyce violations.
One, gloves were eJeceral Reoornrs..nc..
25 '
nct worn by some pecple during operation.
Scre contaminated 282 106
9 7 jw.b q
\\
l' gloves werc being disc.osed of in some improper containers --
p ll 2 jt probably r..aaning, unlabeled as " radioactive."
i 3:
Some lack of security, as I understand.
This had I
i 4;
to do with some of these little glass things being dropped l
1 1
5i.
on floor surfaces and broken, things like that.
6 And one that is heavily involved in the current i
i i
7; situa tion, thes-large inventory losses.
They were writing i
a large numbers of: as to operating losses.
These were found I
i 9,
on a report that is filed with Oak Ridge that is required t
10,
by NRC to be filed on accountability.
Large tritium users t
11.
have to follow certain reporting requirements, and there was i
t I
i 12 an entry apparently that said " operating losses," and that i
i i
l 13 is really what's culminated now in a number of the releases I
14,
that they ' ve had.
1 15 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Now what did the Arizona i
i 16 Commission say about that?
Did they look into that?
17 MR. KERR:
That was one of those citations here 18 in the March one.
19 '
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Yes, but not in August?
20 MR. KERR:
It was a citation then, but it was not y
i I
21 considered with the same intensity that it certainly is new f
I 2: l af ter the March 9 th inspection.
22,
MR. RYAN:
After that inspection, the Ari2cna --
24.
COMIISSIONER KENNEDY :
The March 9th inspecticn 9E90ff at R fDOr'ert. ific, 25 coincides with the March 9 th order.
282 107
10 8 jwh J
d I
i 1'
MR. KERR:
Well, no, the March the 30th order.
n 2 !'l, COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
It would help me if you 3
could just say a few words here about where the material I
4 comes from and what sort of form that it's in.
Just what i,
l i
i 5
are we dealing with here?
If you don't mind, just i
6' MR. KERR:
Okay, the handle a variety of kinds, i
7' some in steel products and things, but the source of the l
1 3
problem, no doubt, is when they recei.ve very large l
l 9
quantities like 100,000 curies' shipments --
l 10 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Where does it come from?
11 MR. KERR:
From Oak Ridge, Carbide.
Most people i
12 bu; it from Oak Ridge.
I I
13 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
And how large a quantity is i
l i
14 t 100,000 curies?
n
'l 15 MR. KERR:
A few grams;.
It comes, I understand, i
16 q in a small, rather small bottle, a flask or a metal container 17 j in gaseous form.
And then they start to process this and 13 '
they fill these very minute glass tubes that eventually now 19 end p in backlit wrist watches, and some in exit signs.
20 And as I understand their process, they use a laser process 21 for cutting these things.
So if it's sealed properly, you 1
22 know, what's in there is fine; but there's no doubt some 22 material is released during the sealing process.
We have 24 scme that are defective, things like that.
,;,cerai a con.<s. me.
25 And nhat's the general type of an operation.
282 108
11 9 jwb i
\\
i 1$
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
When you say *a few grams J
d 23 in a gaseous form," what's the total volume of this gas?
3 What are we talking about?
Again, I'm not quite sure I I
4l have a picture of what we're dealing with coming into this 5
-clant.
i t
6' MR. KERR:
I understand that a 100,000-cu.rie 1
7, shipment would be in a rather modest-sized bottle -- you 8
know, maybe a foot, or a foot-and-a-half tall and, you know, 9
a cubic foot or something like that.
I don't know 10 specifically.
II MR. RYAN:
Under pressure.
I2 MR. KERR:
Yes, under pressure.
i 13 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
And what sort of risks are 14 involved here, an ope'n safety risk, i
15 MR. KERR:
Okay, anytime, you know, you handle 1
16 l large quantities of tritium, it should be handled in a i
i 3,'
hooded-type operation, something like this, the container, i
13 l as the ocerators work with it.
i A
h And if ycu do not have a mechanism for containing 20 the material that goes up the stack, then that's what you 21 would have resulting in big releases, because you may have, I
22 you know -- because the production of these things are by 22 the thcusands, I understand.
%., m_
S d.,v..,-.4 2... u.-a.. s r.
a.d.new :.s t.u.13 m a c e r :.a _,
v.cera, a.cor en. in-
- C con:rciled?
Is there an allcwable level for releases?
282 109
10 j.wb 12 t
i I
i 1l MR. KERR:
Yes.
2' COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
And what would that be?
I i
3l MR. KERR:
The Commission's regulations allow --
I 4!
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
This is the Arizona I
l l
6 Commission?
I i
1 6;
MR. KERR:
And it's the same as ours.
It's for l
I 7l effluent releases to unrestricted areas in air, the most 1
3 restrictive limit is 200 picocuries per liter.
You can make 9'
a note of that:
200 picocuries ner liter.
That's an 10 unrestricted area.
i f
II COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Per liter of air?
i l
12 ;
MR. KERR:
Yes, right.
Per liter, you know, of l
13 !
the effluent going out.
i 14 j COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Is " location of the plant" f
" i t
-1 13 defined as an " unrestricted area"?
16 MR. KERR:
After this one citation, they then 17 made the entire plant boundary the restricted area.
Prior
,2 ;}
i to that, they were using "at the point of release," which is i
i 19 >
a screwhat common approach to do, although you are well 1
20,
entitled to take care of restricted area if you can con:rcl 1
21 access for the purpose of the radiation effect.
22 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I'm sorry, I didn't i
22 '
understand this point.
What is the distinction?
4-MR. KERR:
Okay, criginally as I understand it,
,;.eer, a eooners. in:.
- C eney were tar.ing tne concentrations -- wnen eney catec :ne.T 1
- 2 8. g r
a1iU c
13
,11 jwb l
11 for excessive releases -- within the stack.
They were making 2'
!i a measurement in the stacks.
e l'
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
In the stack?
j i
4 MR. KERR:
Yes -- or at tha point of release from i
S' 1
3 the stack, yes.
t 1
l 6
So theoretically, if that then had not been defined l
r 71 as a " restricted area," you have to use the concentration i
i l
8 limit for the off-site.
Once they made and established that 9
they would control access to, like the fence line aronnd, i
10 !
then you can consider the restricted area the fence lina l
11 1 I
around the plant.
12 i COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
That would be a more i,
i 13 I
(
permissive approach.
I 14 MR. EERR:
It would allow you a dilution factor.
t d
15 i
COMMISSIONER 3RADFORD:
If in fact you were 16 '
emitting 200 picocuries per liter at the fence on a constant 17 basis, what kind of a dose would that result in over 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />, i
la I
'l to an individual who sat at the fence for a whole day.
a 19 '
MR. KERR:
Let me tell you in terms of a yearly.
20 i A yearly, if a person stcod there 168 hours0.00194 days <br />0.0467 hours <br />2.777778e-4 weeks <br />6.3924e-5 months <br /> a week, a full 1
21 1 week, spent all his time, that would result in 500 millirems i
- v. s a year, the way I uncerstand our regulations are structured.
~~
COMMISSIOSER GILINSKY:
500 millirems?
MR. KERR:
500 millirens cer year.
..- eeer i n.oorter s. +c.
.c COMMISSIONER 3RACFORO:
That's if the person spent 282 111
12 j.wb 14 i
i Ih 365 dairs there?
l 2U MR. KERR:
That'is correct.
3 MR. RYAN:
I should say that one of the citations 1
4*
by the state suggested that American Atcmics was releasing i
5'l excessive quantities of tritium to the atmosphere to the h
6' tune of 60,000 curies per quarter, which would translate i
7 to 240,000 --
i 3
MR. KERR.
Well, just a minute.
That is -- that t
9 is approximately right.
The '.otal quantity is a significant i
10 question, but the citation is based on the concentration per i
11 litar.
f 12 MR. RYAN:
Right.
l l
l I3 !
MR. KERR:
The citation is on the concentration, l
l Id because that's the way the regulations express it.
I 15 '
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Do I understand yot to be l
16 d saying tst we' re more permissive here than we would be 17 '!
with a reactor in terms of releases?
l I3!
MR. KERR:
Yes, sir.
You know, i.9 'e rms o f the i
hn '
ALARA, a terms which I think is what you're referring to,
'O there is no ALARA number established for this kind of t
,, i i
l facility that I know of, or =cs: =aterials licensees.
0 CCMMI SSICNER 3RADFORD:
Ecw many facilities like thLs are there?
"~
MR. KERR:
I know of three in the United States Jeceral Aeoorters, Inc. I ec that are in similar type operation.
,) G..)
i coc I
,13 jwb 15 1
l i
I l
1 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
And are those three --
2l MR. RYAN:
One in Pennsylvania, I guess tt:0 in i
i l
3 New York.
i I
4l MR. KERR:
One in New York, that I know of.
l l
5, MR. RYAN:
Part 20 does say they're encouraged --
I 6!
all licensees are encouraged to keep these --
l 7;
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Are these clants that are l
1 i
regulated by us?
Or are those also state regulations' 8l I
I 9
MR. KERR:
One other one is state regulated, and l
l l
10 ;
one is regulated by NRC.
l l
11 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Would they have sinilar I,
l 12 '
histories?
I i
1
(
13 MR. KERR:
We -- the NRC visited the one in i
14 ;
Pennsylvania last week.
They have some question about the 15,
operation; certainly in terms of the total quantities being i
16 '
released from that plant, they cre much, much less than 17 '
what they are in the one in Arizona.
18 MR. RYAN:
And the same is true of New York.
- I 19.;
MR. KERR:
Almost the identical situation in New I
20 '
York.
They are having scme questions about handling l
21.;
procedures in the New York one, and some occasional releases 22 where they've gotten some detectable material in the river 22 and so forth.
24 But again, the total quantities, so far as we t Fecerat Aeoorters. Inc.
25 knew, being released are much, nuch less than what they are 282 113 I
16 14 jwb i
i l
l t
I l.
at this Arizona facility.
it il 2f COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Now when you're saying i3' "much, much less quantities released," is this going back to 4
that 60,000 curies?
j i
5 MR. KERR:
Yes, that ' s in to tal.
And the total i
I 6:
curies.
It's my understanding that the Pennsylvania i
I f
l 7l facility is releasing in the neighborhood of 700 curies per 1
8 year; whereas, the Arizona one may be in the range of a l
i i
9' quarter of a million.
l I
i 7t s my understanding the New York facility may
{
10 l i
II I be releasing 1000 to 1400 curies per year.
i i
i I2 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Now you've mentioned the i
(
I3 number 375,000 curies -- or rather, Bob did -- that was i
l i
l Id er shiement?
e f
i 15 l MR. KERR:
No, the citation was that uney possessec i
16 I at the time they-made the inspection about 370,000 curies, i
l 'l and they said at the time their possession limit was 235,000 i
Ie curies, so they were in overpassession of 100,000.
1c COMMISSIONER 3RADFORD :
Mcw many curies actually 20 pass through that plant in a year?
2I ;
MR. KERR:
We understand it's in the range of a
,, 4 million or so throughput.
COMMISSIONER AHEA32!E:
And you're saying they
,;,cero seconers, inc.
o f it?
lose 25 cercent 2:
e MR. KERR:
That's what I understand. g c.)
ig L U t_
i.
,15 jyb 17 I
I i
1l COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
What is -- I'n sorry.
i i
i 2p COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
How many curies actually i
3 go into a tritium watch?
l 4
MR. KERR:
I don't remember the numbers in the i
5!
tritium watches.
I think it's a few hundred millicuries l
i 6;
in one tritium watch.
l 1
6 l
1 7
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
It seems to me you could i
8; make a lot of watches.
i l
9 MR. KERR:
They make a lot of watches, and they 10
.do also make exit signs, luminous exit signs, for like i
l II l apartment buildings and so on, which have in the range, as l
l l
12 I understand, I think of about 20 curies per sign, or a
(
13 thereabouts.
This is in case you have a lack of -- you 14 know, the electricity goes out in an apartment building, and i
i i
15 '
you have a sign similar to those you have in airplanes so 16 ]
that you can see the exit sign.
o 17.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
When you said 500 millirem, i
i 18 l vou're talkinc. about whole-bcdv. doses?
I l9,
MR. KERR:
The whole body s a critical crgan for 20 '
- tritium, i
l 21 COMMISSICNER GILINSKY:
What dces tritium emit?
"I q
22 3 MR. KERR:
The beta unit.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
An energetic beta?
i MR. KERE:
It's.0186 MEO.
12-year half-life, e eceral Reoorters. Inc.
ac the biological half-life is in the range of 10 cc 12 days.
282 115
,16 jwb is f
I I
1 MR. RYAN:
After the -- if I may resume -- after l
2l the citation and the unannounced inspection, the Arizona I
3 radiation program contacted a tritium expert, wno is j
l 4 ^
Dr. Alan Magnissi from the Environmental Protection Agency, l
i l
I I
5 who, by the way, was on hand for the hearing on Saturday.
l 6'
They also began to take environmental samples, 7l food and urine samples --
i I
l 8
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
What hearing on Saturdav?
I i
9I MR. RYAN:
There was a hearing by the Arizona i
l 10 '
Atomic Energy Commission on Saturday --
I 1
Il !
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
You'll be coming to that?
f i
l 12 f MR. RYAN:
We'll be coming to that -- at which i
13 l r
Mr. Dick Cunningham testified for about five hours.
i 14,
The sample gathering took place throughout May, l
15 l and on the 31st of May EPA phoned in some results of samples.
1 16 I should point out that this f acility is in a -- is along i
I7 a road which is heavily populated with plants for processing IS food.
There are also some churches nearb';
I9 OOMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
It's in Tucson?
I 90 1 MR. RYAN:
Yes.
2 J
,I a There are also residences in the immediate
,i 22 '
vicinity of the facility which, by the way, is unmarked.
22 You would not recognize it as being American Atomics if ycu 24 drove by.
?neceral R epor+ers, Inc.
- C",
One sample WhiCh was significant was fOund in the l
282 116
19 17 j.wb l
l-l' l['
water used in making cake in a food processing plant,
,i 2 il cheek-by-jowl with this facility, which supplied the school i
3, i
lunches for the children of Tucson.
The sample came back I
i 4
i and was phonec in to us on June 1.
51 CCMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
How long has American i
I 6
l Atomics been engaged in this business?
I l
7i l
l MR. RYAN:
They have been engaged in the business I
8',
for sometime, but only actively in tritium for the last
+
9 approximately four years.
They were one of the licensees 10 !
which were assigned to the State of Arizona for supervision 11 ;
j at the time the AEC entered into the Agreement with the 12 !
State of Arizona in 1967.
But their work was with krypton i
I 13 :
and their continuing and expanded work with tritium dates I
I 14 back to only about four years.
i 15.
]
COMMISSIONER 3RADFORD:
Bob, what are the 16 i requirements for off-site monitoring for this facility?
17 MR. RYAN:
There are very few.
18.l Wavne, I'll let you talk to that.
I tals it i
h 19 i
= ore specifically.
i 20 MR. KERR:
I don't think there was anything I
21 i specific in this one.
It's my understanding that probably
-, {
ua the situation was they were relying upon stack effluent
-, a
=cni:Oring, and that --
24 COIO ISSIONER KENNED'? :
Excuse me, Wayne.
Oc cur
,.:mr., a.wn.rs. i nc.
25 regulations require any?
qn-L0 l l7 1 '
18 jwb 20 i
l!
MR. KERR:
There's nothing in our regulations 0
i 2i that require people to do any specified kind of monitoring.
i i
l i
3 Let me tell you, for example, what I understand the 4
Pennsylvania person is doing, and what I understand we may l.
5; be after.
i I
6i They have a monitor at a fence line, which is I
I 7
also nearby, but there are questions whether that is i
i 1
3 detecting the plume from that plant.
And so monitoring l
9 should be out where you estimate the plume will come.
10 And again, I can't speak from experience by.saying l
II !
I've looked at all three licenses, and say that they did l
12 '
require certain tyc.e of monitorinc. out in the environment.
I, 1
i,
/
13 Many licensees frequently rely upon a calculation of stack l
I i
14 effluent, and if it appears, you know, they're operating il 13 9, within limits, normally I would think you would expect it 16 to be more within limits, you know --
9 17 ]
CO>D1ISSIGNER GILINSKY :
Did vo' sav " calculation 1
1"l of stack effluents" to measuring effluents?
o 19 MR. KERR:
In this case, they did have a i
20 seasurement.
They did have a measuring device.
~;
has questionec the adequacy c:
n,at measuring device.
f None theless, they had a measuring device in the stack.
4-23 And based on measurements and/or calculations, in varies by different kinds of licensees.
Scme more modest, but r Keceral Reporters. Its, ]
ac you knew they may have effluent, people do calculate what is i
70q 1 1o LUL llo
19 jwb 21 l
f 11 L
going up there, and if it appears, you know, rather low, 9
li I
S t
' I we probably would not : quire, you know, an independent stack i
s s
l 3
monitoring.
l l
l l
4 ',
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
What do we require?
l S
MR. KERR:
I cannot speak specifically of what we l
6 required in the case of Pennsylvania, but it's my under-7!
standing they must have some knowledge because they know i
i 8
about 700 curies per year are being released from the 9'
Pennsylvania plant.
t i
10 i i
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Bill, do you know what we i
11 I
require?
I I
12 i MR. DIRCKS:
Nat Bassin is head of that section, i
i
.13 i
the Industrial Products Section.
I I
14 ;
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I can't hear you, Bill.
15 MR. DIRCKS:
Nat Bassin is head of the Industrial i
16,
Products Section.
i 17 1 MR. BASSIN:
Right now, we don't require any la!
environmental monitorinc.
We have dec. ended on measurements 17 at the fence boundary and dif fusion calculations which would 20 shew that the concentration of tritium at the site boundary
-9 i, would be in compliance with the requirements in Part 20.
COMMISSIONER GIL. L Y:
But how do you know hcw
- e..
much is released?
z4 MR. 3ASSIN:
"' hey have records based on air ficw r.secer., a,oorwri o,c.,
n.c 4
jicers"ur:
through the stack.
Everything is released a-10 8/_
Ii/
20 jwb 22 l
1 l
i t
l 5
I j,
through one stack, all of the gaseous tritium.
So based on P
I 2'I the concentrations measured at the exit of the stack and l
3:
l l
the amount of air flowing through the stack, they have I
i g1 I
I determined the amount of tritium that is released.
I r
5' l
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Do we require this stack I
6' I
monitoring?
i' 7
MR. BASSIN:
Yes.
We require stack monitoring.
i l
I 8i I think Wayne indicated that we're not entirely happy with l
l i
9' the boundary monitoring because the plume might not touch io i I,
down.
I ll i j
They have monitoring at the stack -- at the site i
12 '
boundary which indicates that the concentrations are well 13 l below Par,t 20, but they are -- we were up there last week, i
and they are undertaking a program of environmental t
i 15 monitoring.
I understand that our Office or Inspection and i
16 '
Enforcement is also going to be going out and doing some 17 !
1 followup work.
18 i o'
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Let me see if I can make 19 '
clear, tho ugh, we dc require stack monitoring, you say?
I 20 !
I MR. 3ASSIN:
Yes, sir.
21 '
l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
And in that monitoring, do e,
dd we out a requirement en the sensitivity of the instrumen ?
~~
MR. SASSIN:
Well, we look to see that the instrumentation that they have s capable of measurement.
see.w sew n.,s.inc.,
,e '
And actually, at U.S.
Radian in 31ccmsburg, tha
-o' eases at 282 i20
21 jwb 23 il i
1 I
the exit of the stack are higher than would be permitted for 2
unrestricted areas, but they're depending on dilution i'
a" between the top of the stack which is about 60 feet high, i
i i
and the site boundary, for compliance.
I I
1 l
5 j
And the question we have now:
Is the monitoring at 6'
person-height at the site boundary really adequate to really i
i 7'
tell you what is actually crossing the site boundary?
l B
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
But, Wayne, you seemed to i
be saying earlier that the rate at which tritium was leaving i
t 10 l the Aricana facility was at least a couple of hundred times 1
i i
11 i greater than the rate at which it was leaving this 12 :
i i
Pennsylvania facility?
i 13 1 MR. KERR:
The total quantities released are very l
l 14 '
i i
much greater, based on the best records that are available, i
i 15 the total quantities released.
But now again, thev cited 16 them for excessive concentrations that anounted to, in the
-I
/ -
range of --
a 18 ll 1
MR. DIRCKS:
I think it might be --
19 MR. 3ASSIN :
The amount of tritium throughput at I
'O the U.S.
Radium f acility is about 50,000 curies per year, 1
21 l well belcw that at American Atomics, and their loss rate r
ne i in operatinc losses is about 1 percent, or just a little u
over 1 percent o f the anount of throughput.
- 4-For 1979, if they continue to release at the same t + tder al A fDCrit'", I M.
"C
~~
rate they're releasing new, they would release about 550 curies 282 121
22 jwb 24 I
i 1!
h of tritium, which is just about 1 percent of the throughput.
i 2
l COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Well, I guess whe e I was 3i headed is:
How could a difference which is so great go i
.'I undetected for such a long period of time, assuming it was l
l 1
5l in fact there for that time?
i i.
6 MR. KERR:
Okay, the most current information I l
t t
7-4 I
have, Commissioner, is that the March inspection disclosed j
8
the releases in concentrations perhaps 11, and in some 9'
cases -- depending upon some of the MPCs you use, and there 10 are varying MPCs -- but 11 times MPC in the stack.
11 Now they did apply diffusion calculations, also, j
l and determined then that at the site boundary it was 13 probably just about below -- right at MPC.
14 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
How could you get 11 times d
15 !
it in the stack, to permissible level at the site boundary?
16 '
MR. KERR:
It doesn't take very much to do that.
17 ]j You know, it disperses rather readily, even though it's a 18 fairly close boundary.
19 i COMMISSIONER 3RADFORD:
In comparison between 20 t the Pennsylvania situation and the Arizona situation with 21 regard to folicwing, do we actually read in Pennsylvania, 22 '
or dces the S : e of Arizona actually read the instruments
,,a
~~
in Arizona?
Or is that done entirely by the licensee?
24
,ca m e nex n.n.inc. '
MR. KERR:
Well, the record of the releases are La subject to inspection by the State of Arizona.
qO9 1 'y 9 LUG I
L
25 23 jwb l
i 1
COMMISSIONER 3RADFORD:
That's what he writes i
2p down.
How do we know Ehat's what it was actually?
i 3 I MR. KERR:
I understand.
They're not there all 4t i
the time to read the instrument.
i 5!
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Nor are we up in Pennsylvania.
c t
6' i
We simply verify what he wrote down.
i i
7 MR. KERR:
Now they may be continuous -- there 8
may be continuous recording.
The State of Arizona, one of 9t i
l their charges in this case is that the3 C.
not have 10,
adequately record'd, also, some of these tnings, but if it l
l 11 l
was a continuous recorder, then theoretically it's subject to 12-inspection at any time.
l 13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
And all the loss rate is 14 throuch the stack?
u I
MR. KER :
Well, I don't want to say 100 percent, 16 '
"I but as far as we know that's the problem case.
17 [!
MR. RYAN:
One of the problems.
13 i l
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
How expensive is tritiam?
l 19 '
MR. KERR:
A dollar a curie.
20 i COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
So that 5250,000 a year is going up the stack?
MR. KERR:
Yes, that's right.
MR. RYAN:
Let me get back :: this sample which 24 was phoned in to us en June 1, conducted by the -- the 4.:.c r a.oorms, inc.
,c sample was analyzed by the IPA at its laboratory at Las Vegas, 282 123
26 24 jwb I
i I
11
]!
and it showed in loose water in cake, 56,000 picocuries per li 2 !!
a liter.
I 3'
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
56,000?
4 MR. RYAN:
That's right.
i I
5 The EPA drinking water standard is 20,000 l
6' picocuries per cubic liter.
The Arizona Atomic Energy 7';
Commission and radiation staff also took a number of other i
I 8
samples, the results of which came in the following Monday.
9!
Let me get to those in a minute, but on Friday, June 1, our i
10 !
man, Joel Lubenau, who was functioning for Wayne in his 1
1 1
absence, at my direction called the Arizona Atomic Energy l
i i
12 '
Commission and said that it was our recommendation that the 1
13 l f
facility should be closed down immediately.
l j
t 14 I should point out that the Pima County Health c1, 15 ?
/
Department immediately moved in and closed the f acility 16,
which had been preparing school lunches.
3 l/
On June 2, wnich was a Saturday, the Arizona lai Atomic Energy Commission met in emergency meeting and the 19 final result of their deliberation was a 4 to 3 vote to 20 I allow the plant to continue in operation.
21 '
l Our recc=mendation was placed before the Atomic
-,n 44 Ii Energy Commissicn by Mr. Geiser -- a conversation between 23 Mr. Geiser and the head of the commiscien, a fellcw by the a~
name cf Willis.
e F cer i aeocnen. me.
25 '
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Your recc=mendation was
") G 1 1
}24 i
27 25 jwb i
i l
l i
II the rirong one, or --
,I t
2l MR. RYAN:
Yes, our recommendation was the normal i
t 3-i one.
I l
4l However, on Monday, a numbar of other sanples came i
i I
5!
i in.
Monday, this would be the 4th of June.
A swimming i
i i
6!
pool which is owned bv a Roman Catholic Church immediately i
7:
l behind the facility showed concentrations of 417,000 pico-8 curies per liter.
9' A backyard pond, goldfish pond, had 74,000 3
f 0
10 '
picocuries per liter.
l 11 i Tap water in the food clant showed 4000 cicocuries i
12 1 per liter, i
i 13 '
The urine of residents was ana1y:ed and the
~
14 '
'i results came back that Monday.
The highest reading was i
15 j l
39,800 picocuries per liter in a 6-vear-old boy.
16 '
l As I say, we also learned that there were a number 17 j
- other food processing plants in the immediate vicinity of i
la ]
it.
i I
19 '
As a result of this information, and as a result 20 i of the fact that our oral recommendation had been rejected, 21 1
I sent William Willis a telegram.
William Willis is the on i Chairman of the Arizona Atcmic Energy Cc=missicn.
This want out on June 4th.
And we said --
24 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Are you going to read it?
seer i meconvi, inc.
-c, se gq MR. RYAN:
I'll read part of it.
orry.
26 jwb 28 i
e I
r 1
Go ahead.
s i
2l' COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
No, I just was hoping to i
3\\
see it.
I I
4 MR. RYAN:
Okay, I'd be happy to give it to you.
I S
j "We understand a recent inspection by state i
6 disclosed excessive releases of tritium to the atmosphere
[
i 71 1
have occurred, and that the state has cited the licensee I
8I i
l for noncompliance with Arizona regulations covering release j
i 9'
of radioactive material to the atmoschere.
i i
10 "We further understa nd samples of food collected i
11 l from a nearby food processing plant serving the local school I
i l'
12 !
system has been analyzed by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency and found to contain tritium in excess of 14 l
EPA limitations in drinking water.
IS !
"We also understand the Arizona Atomic Enere_v.
j 16 '
Commission Staff, acting on this information and working with 17t the local county health depart.aent, has arranged a shutdown 18 of the food processing plant in which the sample was 19 1 obtained.
20 !
1 "The office of State Programs on June 1,
- 1979, l
21 :
P racommended immediate shutdown of the licensee's operation.
,, -.. l We further understand that this recc=mendation was conveyed to the acting executive director of tne Atomic Energy 24 Cc= mission, to the commission, during its emergency session
..:.e.e., a.:en.n. i nc.
cn June 2, 1979.
282 126
27 jwb 29 i
11 I
"I understand that your commission voted to allow I
i 2
American Atomics Corporation to continue in operation.
I i
I 3'I wish to renew this office's recommendation for the immediate l
closing of American Atomics Corporation.
This is a prudent i
t I
I i
and, in our judgment, a necessary measure to take until l
l 6'
further information is available.
7 "The NRC is ready to assist the state in this i
8i matter.
Please do not hesitate to ask for our help."
i 9
The help that we talked of consisted of two i
10 '
inspectors from our Region 5 office who arrived there early
.i i
1 i
11 I
I last week to assist the state in taking samples.
There are i
i 5
12 i
j a number of other samples which have come in since that 13 i
time, all of which show elevated levels of tritium.
i i
14 1
I might point out that this is the only facility i
i i
15 :
in the area which handles tritium in the normal course of 16 its operations.
Therefore, it seems to me it's the only 17 j possible source of this tritium.
la '
I have no idea of how this tritium is getting into 19 the water which is used in making the cake across the screet, 20 or how it's getting into the swimming pool of the Rcman
'l' Catholic Church.
1 22 i I suspect that it has to dc with the emissions from
,,a the stack, although I cannot prove that.
One of the prcblems
~~
24 which EPA encountered was that they could not lay hands t #ecerne ReDor+ers. f nc.
SC immediately on equipment which could be brought in to measure 282 127
..8 jwb 30 i
i i
i l
Il the stack emissions.
i li 2f heard from Chairman Hendrie on Wednesday of 7
i 3l last week, who told me that Gcvernor Babbitt was exercised l'
i I
4l about my telegram to the Arizona Atomic Energy Commission.
I i
5!
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Did we, by the way, get i
l 6
copies of this?
i I
7l MR. RYAN:
Did I get copies of it?
8 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Did the Commissioners get i
9, a copy of this?
I 10 !
MR. RYAN:. Yes, we sent you a preliminary notifi-l t
i II !
cation on the same day.
i i
I2 COMMISSIONER BRACFORD:
I don't think the wire f
1 I
(
I3 l
.l
- i itself came down, though, Bob.
I4 MR. RYAN:
Commissioner Ahearne's office asked i
I "t for it, and the substance was in our notice.
It was a i
16 preliminary notification I believe dated June 4.
II COMMISSIONER GIZINSKY:
What day of the week would la 1; that have been?
i l
MR. KERR:
June 4.
'O MR. RYAN:
Mc-v.
l t
21 j MR. KERR:
Preliminary Notification No. 79-13 came Jo m
5 down June the 4th.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes, they had mentioned --
MR. RYAN:
I might say that before we sent nhe e-Feceral Recor'ers, Inc.
,e telegram I consulted with Mr. Gossick, with Mr. Shapar, and 282 128
29 jwb 31 i
l t
1 with representatives from Mr. Dircks' office.
6 i
i 2
~
Dircks' office was at The representation from Mr.
i three levels.
I talked to Jay Casner, to Bernie Singer, l
l 4i and to Dick Cunningham.
And I put to them the facts that I
5' I had at hand, and I said:
What would you do if you had l
6 a similar situation in a non-Agreement State?
I 7l And I got a universal response:
We would shut it I
8 down and conduct an immediate investigation to find out j
i i
9l how this tritium was getting out where it shouldn't be.
l i
10 '
It was a fair inference, all of those gentlemen i
11 said, that there's something radically wrong in the process l
l 12 l
of this company which allows this kind of tritium to escape i
i
(
13 1 i
to the environment.
I 14 l I met with the Governor later on that af ternoon, 15 and I didn't find him to be irritated.
i 16 !
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I think we ought to go back 17 just one second.
18 1
]
MR. RYAN:
Sure.
19 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
You said he was upset, or 20 exercised, about your telegram?
21 MR. RYAN:
Yes.
22 COMMISSICNER KENNEDY In what -- Ecw In I to i
h 23 interpret that statement?
z.,
MR. RYAN:
I didn't have the original ccnversation
- Feaerei semners. ine.
u.
x with the Governor.
Chairman Hendrie did.
I gather the 282 129
30 jwb 32 j
1 Governor gave Chairman Hendrie the impression that he felt il i
sandbagged -- that was the phrase that Chairman Hendrie used i
31 to me.
I i
4 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
In what way?
i l
5 i
MR. RYAN:
I asked the same question.
I said, 6
the reason I had sent Governor Babbitt a coov of mv telecram i
i t
7 was to put him on notice.
i t.
8 You see, there is a problem out in Arizona, and i
I 9'
it is that the Arizona Atomic Energy Commission is a quasi-10 i independent organization.
It is not a cabinet department, I
Il i official -- Chairman Hendrie, in the sense that the I
12 !
Transportation Department of the State of Maryland is a i
l' i
13 cabinet Department reporting to Governor Hughs.
Governor 14 Hughs has control over that cabinet department because he i
15 !
can tell the cabinet department what he wants done, and how i
16 '
he wants it done, and the incumbent serves at the pleasure 17!l of the governor.
18 i That is not the case with the 12-man Atomic 19 a Energy Ccmmission of the State of Arizona.
It is a quasi-20 independent organization.
Th. members serve for terms,
^ 1 )'
rather than at the pleasure of the go~-rnor.
And the 7
1 n:
"l governor's authority is ultimately by the power cf appoint-m ment, but many of the members of the Atomic Energy Cc= mission
'~
24 cf the State of Ari Ona were appointed long before Governor s-receral Recor*ers. Inc. g o.c Sabbitt ever came to of fice, when Governor 3abbitt was sworn 282 130
,31 j,wb 33 I
4 i.
1 in in January of this year.
I 2l l
MR. GOSSICK:
Let me just add one point here.
The i
i 3-Chairman called me, after having spoken to Bob -- or i
4!
actually, I saw him downtown here, and he had indicated j
5 I t
that he'd had this conversation with the governor, and I got t
j 6'
the impression from Chairman Hendrie that, although a copy i
I 7l of this was sent to his office, somehow the press had I
i picked it up before he had become aware of it.
Perhaps l
8' 1
f l
he was in here on the President's Commission, I just don't i
i 10 i know, but apparently he didn't know about it until it had i
i I
I ll i i
l already broken in the press.
l 12 '
But Bob can tell you about the conversation.
13 i
MR. RYAN:
Yes.
Later that afternoon -- which i
14,
would have been --
i 15 !!
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Now this is what date?
i 16 i MR. RYAN:
The 13th.
June 13th, Wednesday afternoon' a
17 ]
last, Dick Cunningham and I went down to the Presidential 1,
18.i
- l Cc= mission's offices at 2121 M Street, and we met with 19 Dale Pontias, who is the execu'.ive assistant to Governcr
'O l 3abbitt, and Governor 3abbitt, for about six hours.
It 21 I lasted six hours because the Governor was in and out
,, d.
because he had Cc= mission business going on, and meetings
. ~,
going on.
24 But we recited what our understanding cf the
. m_ere neocnen,inc.
SC
'~
case was.
And the Governor agreed with our assessment of the 282 r.
% l d $
34 32 jwb i
i I,
i i
I l'!
matter.
And while we were there, and in our presence, he i
l 2
called Mr. Peter Biehl, B-i-e-h-1, who is the president of l
i I
I 3t i
American Atomics Cor oration.
I 4
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
He also is a member of the l
l Atomic Energy Commission.
I I
I 6'
MR. RYAN:
No, I don't think he was.
Mr. Harry i
i I
Dooley was a former member of the Atomic, and he is no
'1 71 l
4 I
8',
longer on the Atomic Energy Commission, but he was the vice j
i 9
president of American Atomics Corporation.
I i
i 10 That's another problem which threads its way i
t j
through this transaction.
i 12 l COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Was he on the commission 1
1 i
13 i while he was acting as vice cresident of the company?
14 MR. RYAN:
Yes, he was.
Yes, he was.
As a matter of fact, the Tucson Citizen reports that he accompanied 16 '
inspectors from the Atomic Energy Commission on inspections
.I 17 i cf a f acilicy at which P was a vice president while he was n
18 l serving on the Atomic Energy Commission.
i 19 1 There is also a recount in there of Mr. Ocn Gilbert's i
20 problem, and the fact that -- well, let me read it to you:
- 1 !
"Mr. Donald Gilbert has been under criticism for
^
22 ',
personal and professional reasons, and he himself was said" --
mi
., c o..,
,,, v_L S S O h..,:.s.s..., Ar..,.:
e 24 va a- - ';.
vueo ve
.;.c.r.i se:xrters. inc.
c COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I'm not e
5 eading a f
33 jwb 35 I
l I newspaper article is really --
l 2i I
l MR. RYAN:
Okay.
3 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I wouldn't mind hearing it.
41 if we have time.
5 l
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Well, are we vouching for the i j
6, i
accuracy of the article?
i I
.I 7
i COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
He's readinc. a news.cacer l
i 8'i article.
o MR. RYAN:
I'm reading a newspaper article.
I i
10 won't read it if you don't want, but the point that is made i
t 11 )
i in here is that --
12 !
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
You can read it, as far as i
l 1 ~7 l t
I'm concerned.
l 14 MR. RYAN:
All right --
l 15,
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I think we all understand --
't 16 !!
MR. RYAN:
-- may it please the Commission:
i
- / t
" Donald C.
Gilbert has been under criticism for a'
i 18 0 perscnal and professional reasons, and he himself said that 19 after 12 years he has beccme ineffective.
He felt the
~n 4w Nuclear Regulatory Ccamission is breathing down his neck
'l on tranica mine licensing procedures.
He admitted that he held the August inspection report on his dess until he
^^
'3' resigned."
He resigned from --
~~
CC}"CESIONE3 GILINSEY:
And Oi5 i3 f 03 30 320i010
.>.cero aemr ers. inc.
~c
- s in?
282 1a3
,34 jvb 36 i
I MR. RYAN:
This is an article in the Arizona Daily 2 lllStar, Saturday, June 16 th, 1979.
3l Let me get back to my poiat.
My point is that i
l i
4I part of the problem -- which I think is pretty well I
i l
5 recognized -- is that the Atomic Energy Commission of the i
6 State of Arizona has two responsibilitier:
one regulatory, l
1 7'
and one promotional.
And it has had those responsibilities I
i g
since tn.e t1=e or its inception, and it is a problem, and I I
I i
9 don't think there's any way we can get away from it.
I 10 !
At any rate, Governor Babbitt called the II l president of the American Atomics Corporation about 5:30 or i
12 '
6:00 o' clock our time on Wednesday the 13th, and said that l
1
(
13 he felt that the plant should voluntarily close down I
I4b pending a hearing which was scheduled for Saturday, June I
l 16th.
l 15 16 He felt that it was a continuing problem to remain 1
I7 open, even if it worked at a lesser schedule than it had r
18 been working aeretofore, and he said to Mr. Siehl that he
?
I9 felt so strongly about this that if the company did not
,n ';
voluntarily close it down, he was prepared to look to his s
,I emergency powers as Governor, and also he would look to the
,- o question of whether he could renounce the Agreement State
'3 program with the NRC, and have the Agreement State program g.F ed er al R eDor'ef t, Inc.
4
^
at which point he was confident revert to SRC surervis_cn,
- C that NRC would immediately close the plant down. 28 2 12,4
35 jwb 37 t,
I i
l i
ll He asked for our assistance in testifying before i
2j the Arizona Atomic Energy Commission on the 16th, and I l
3; had indicated that Mr. Kerr had planned to go out there for I
4l sometime, and Mr. Cunningham indicated that he would be l
5 !
happy to go out.
In fact, he did go out on Friday, the e
i l
6l 15th.
1 l
i 7:l He appeared at the hearing on the 16th and i
8!
testified, as I say, :or approximately five hours.
9 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Can I just ask you, can 10 a governor terminate an agreement?
l i
II MR. SHAPAR:
Not without our approval, in effect.
l 12 '
The relevant provision is one. sentence in the Atomic Energy l
1 13 Act, 2.7 4 ( j ), and it reads as follows:
1 I4 '
"The Commission, upon its own initiative, after 15,
reasonable notice and opportunity for hearing to the state i
16 with which an agreement under subsection (b) has become 17 !l effective, or upon the request of the governor of such i
IS ]
state, may terminate or suspend all or part of its agreement i
19 ]
with the state and reassert the licensing and regulatory 20 authority vested in it under the Act, if the Commission finds i
21 that (1) such termination or suspension is required to 22 protection the public health and safety;" and another reascn.
23 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
So it's entirely possible
^4 that he coul: request a termination of that portion of the E def 31 A fDONtr5, Inc.
t
- C agreement that covers that.
1 282 135
36 i,wb 38 l
s l
4 lj MR. SEAPAR:
Yes, and the ability to terminate i
2l a portion of the agreement was due to a recent amendment, i
3I the Uranium Mills Tailing Control Act.
Before that, it i
i I
4' was just the whole agreement.
t I
5:
MR. RYAN:
Okay, I also should point out that the I
i 6
Commission addressed this question in the proposed agreement i
7(
with the State of Michigan, where the stumbling block to --
l l
8 recently -- where the stumbling block to an Agreement 1
i I
I 9i State agreement with Michigan had to do with the mutuality
\\
i 10 !
of the termination provisions.
And we've written language II,
which the Governor of Michigan has subsequently found l
l i
12 I acceptable, whereby we could accept a determination that the I
I 13 State of Michigan was no longer interested in the program, j
^
l 14 h and make a rapid-fire determination that that would -- if 15 he took the people off, it would therefore not be protective i
16 of the public interest, and terminate fairly quickly.
o a
ja i
/
1 At any rate --
a l d'
?
COMMISSICSER 3RADFORD :
Go ahe&d, Bob, if you d
lc were going to.
I wanted to come back --
-n "i
MR. RYAN:
I do, too.
Let me make one pivotal 2I.
point here.
a
-4 0
" l On Friday night, June 15th, the Atomic Energy o
23 '
Commission of the State of Arizona closed the plant, using its emergency powers.
I don't know --
t Keceral A fDor*tts, IFC.
ee COMMISSIONER ERADFORD:
You mean the president of 282 136
S9 37 jwb I
the company declined to close it even after the Governor 2'j spoke to him?
I 3!
MR. RYAN:
That is my understanding.
The i
i 4
president of the plant declined to close it.
We left it --
\\
\\
5' COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Even though he was aware I
6 of this data?
He was aware of nhe numbers that we ' ve been i
7 talking about?
l I
i
)
8, MR. RYAN:
Yes, indeed.
I i
9!
MR. DIRCKS:
Well, not only that, but after the i
10 Governor closed it, they're in court today.
That's where i
Il Cunningham is still.
He's been requested by the Governor j
f i
12 to appear in court to assist the state in keeping the plant i
I 13 shut down, and Cunningham just talked to me, and the i
Governor and the State has presented its case, and the judge 14 i I.
15 ;
has now decided that he's going to consider -- may give a 1
16 l decision this af ternoon whether he's going to allow the
,i I
1 ' 'q plant to shut down, or whether he's going to allow the t
18 plant to open up again.
I9 l COMMISSIONER AEZARNE:
The plant then is contesting 20 '
the shutdown?
2I -
MR. DIRCKS:
Yes.
22 MR. KERR:
Yes, as Scb said, Satarday morning, 23 the hearing was to be a: 3:00 o' clock Aricona time this morning.
The hearing itself is to resume tomorrow.
It
~.
secero a.:eners. inc.
recessed Saturday evening, and to resume tomorrow, the
- C J
L) h 9 I3/
j7-ul
40
,38 iwb i
1 hearing.
1 2'
COMMISSIONER 3BADFORD:
If I swam in a swimming I
i I
3!
pool with 417,000 picocuries per liter for half an hour, of I
tritium, what kind of a dose would I get?
4 i
5 MR. RYAN:
Well, we have the urine sample of the 6
lady who swims regularly in this swimming pool, and I think i
7l it was somevhere in the neighborhood of 60- or 70,000 l
I 8
picocuries per liter urine.
1 i
i i
9I MR. SHAPAR:
And the drinking water standard is 10 l 20,000?
1 1
II i MR. RYAN:
Yes.
I 12 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
But presumably -- now I
I 13 !
people don't usually drink all that much?
l I
14 MR. RYAN:
No, they don't.
But in tritiated water, 1
11 15 it penetrates the tissue.
y P
16 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Right.
But I was
),'
wondering whether that's the best measure of nhe dose?
i IS MR. KERR:
Commissioner, be sure you understand, l9 now, if you're drinking that -- let's say you're drinking 20 this material, to give you those doses I talked about before, 21 you have to do it all year long at a normal race of intake J
of like 2 liters a day.
23 1 COMMISSIONER 3FADFORD:
Which foses?
9 4 ~4 MR. KIRR:
I mentioned 500 millirem.
If you --
m:,w.i ae:enen. inc.
,,'c COMMISSIONER 3RADFORD:
But you didn't mention in 282 138 1
39 jwb 41 i
I l
e l
11',
in conjunction with --
l i
i
,j i
' i' MR. KERR:
Not the 400,000.
If you drink the i
3 EPA -- I'm sorry, if you drink --
l i
4 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
If you drink water with I
l 5
20,000 curies, picocuries --
6' MR. KERR:
Just a minute.
If we drink water that i
1 7l' l
is at the MPC in NRC's regulations for off-site --
i I
8' COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Which is?
20,000 picocuries? !
i s
I 9
MR. KERR:
No, sir.
It is 3 million.
1 10 '
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
3 million?
11 i I
l MR. KERR:
3 million is NRC's MFC, much greater t,
i, 12 i
than the EPA drinking water standard, which affects water i
13 l
ycu sell to the public, and so on.
I COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Why do we have a standard i
15 '
1 that's orders of magnitude bigger than EPA's?
16 i MR. KERR:
The indication, as I understand, the 17,
theory behind the NRC regulation is that you do not really la '
expect to drink water ccming out of effluent.
You really 19 anticipate there will be large dilutions and processing 20 before it gets to people to drink.
21 {
It is conceivable that an individual might drink
.i
,. e __
CCMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
NRC's standard relates to a 24 orcienced discharge from the plant.
ereceral a ccorters. Inc.
25 MR. KERR:
Yes, sir, to unrestricted areas.
But
'82 Is~ r}
2
42
'40 job I,
in theory, you could drink 3 million picocuries per liter of 2[ water, and your normal intake is something like 2 liters of f
3 water a day.
And you would have to take in water at that 4i rate for all 365 days a year to result in the 500 millirem.
l 5i COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
At the NRC MPC.
l l
6' MR. KERR:
That's correct.
7!
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Tha*.'s 3 million?
l 8'
MR. KERR:
Yes, sir.
I 9
MR. RYAN:
By the way, this is basically --
10 l COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
So now we're back to where --
1 I
II :
to help me -- back to where Mr. Bradford was.
We're back in 12 )
that swimming pool.
I 13 l So the person swims in the swimming pool a half an h
Id hour a day -- in Arizona you can do that all year around, l
15 certainly in Tucson -- or an hour, some period of time, pick 16 one, all day long, every day, 365 days a year.
What total 17 dose is he going to get?
, J.
j8 MR. KERR:
If you -- if it resulted in taking in lo the eculvalent of the EPA drinking water standard, 20,000 2C picocuries per liter, you will get 4 mi_lirem per year.
2I That's what the numbers related to dose in the EPA drinking 3,
water standard is, 4 millirem per year from than 20,000 picocuries.
OOMMISSICNER AHEARNE:
That's 2 parts a day, tJederal 9eporters, Inc.
-c every day.
q-1 lj Q i
c
!=
+
41 iwb 43 l
i 1
MR. KERR:
That's correct.
I 2
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
But that's if you drink 3i it, t
t i
s 4
MR. KERR:
Yes, but you see, you can -- if you I
5, swim, you know, you can get an exchange through the skin, i
i i
6!
you understand.
You may ingest some by drinking it, you l
7' know, and so on, and I can't tell you how much might go I
i 3,
which way.
l l
9:
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
But it would doubtless not i
10 be more than drinking it.
II !
MR. KERR:
No, that's right.
I I
i I
i 12 '
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Let me ask, I. don't know, l
1 I
13 !
Bill, or your fellow there, I am now confused as to what it l
t l
l 14 [
is about these numbers that violate your standards.
l l
15 l MR. DIRCKS:
In this particular plant?
Well, I i
i 16 think the point that Dick was talking to me about just on l,',
the phone, the one point where we tnink thev are in excess 1
13 I of our standards is in the worker exposure.
I9 We think, frcm what we gather from Dick's 20 conversation with me, they've exceeded their worke.r exposure 2I limits inside that plant.
That in itself is enough to --
em COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Inside the plant.
MR. KERR:
The T.aximum allowable dose.
N"'4 COMMISSICNSR AHEARNE:
But the numbers that we've
..secere neooners. in:.
been hearing in the water, the swimming pocl, et cetera, that d
282 141
44 42 jab i
l'I doesn't sound like -- putting the more important question 2l is whether it's serious, but at least as far as our 3
regulations are concerned, it doesn't sound like it's --
4' COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
But it was serious enough i
5' for the health department of Pima County to shut down the cake l I
I i
i I
6, manufacturer.
So I'm not sure just how serious it is.
7l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I don't know.
I was asking i
f 8-Bill the question.
9l MR. SEAPAR:
You' re talking about the standards in l
10 Part 20.
And I don't think we have a handle on that point.
t 4
i 11,
MR. KERR:
Let me try to characteri=e why I see, i
12 {
the basis for our recommendation that they should shut down.
i We have a company releasing very large quantities of 13 l
t 14 4 tritium into the atmosphere, and they were cited for the 15 excessive releases.
}
16 :
We have what appear to be very large losses.
17 "
You have various water samples that are certainly elevated I
o 13 i with tritium, some of them above EPA drinking water standards, 19 others -- using that as a reference point -- like the swimming 20 pcci that are much above.
In cake, loose water, they squeeze 21 '
it, Ehat's why you get the loose water, as I understand 22 their analysis, and taka the free water.
A backyard pond, t
22 for example, gcidfish pond, tap water in the food plan:
24 belcw the EPA drinking water standards, but elevated; t3fCtral Reporters, Inc.
I 25 urine and resins -- I've got a few points here I'd like to 282 142
43 jwb 45 i
L i
d 11 focus on.
h 2l COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
By all means.
Go ahead.
i 3,
MR. KERR:
The food is used in the school lunch i
I program.
It was 40,000 lunches a day.
The workers in the 4
i f
i I,
5, food plant had detectable tritium in the urine, although much i
I 6
lower than what you would expect for workers.
j i
7 You don't know --
i 8'
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
The radiation workers?
l i
9 MR. KERR:
Yes, for radiation workers, because 10 they' re not radiation workers.
They' re in the food plant.
i i
i 11 '
COMSISSIONER GILINSKY:
Which they didn ' t think l
I i
12 thev were.
I i
i 4
13 MR. KERR:
That's right, they're no-14 So you have a mechanism of transfer of the tritium n
11 15 '
to water and the exact mechanism is not known.
You have the 16 mechanism exposures of the people in the food plant.
They 17 :I may get it from swimming.
They may get it from drinking I3li the tap water in the plant.
You don't know.
w" Therefore, it seems to me you've got the exposure 20 pathways that are not known.
You've go: tritium in the food I
21 chain.
You have a susceptible -- =cre susceptible population 22 group involved -- children in some cases, in a f ai-ly large 23 cases, there are others -- and it 's not consisten: with an
.d ALARA concept which -- now I recognize there are no ALARA eJeceral Reporters, Inc.
I 25 '
nu=bers established for this kind, but it's always been the 143' 28Q f
c
46 44 j,wb l
1 I
1 bI philosophy of the Radiation Protection people that you keep
!l 2 'l axposures, you know, if you can --
L 3r MR. SEAPAR:
Doesn' t Part 20 specifically say, i
i I
i 4
though, licensees should keep exposures as low as l
l I'
5' practicable, below the limits?
l 1
6 MR. KERR:
But there's no numcers on it.
That's 7
i j
right.
And the Arizona regulations are quite similar.
j i
1 3'
Therefore, it seemed to me that the prudent thing I
9 to do is to more fully assess the total impact on the 10 '
community and so forth, that you -- you know, if you improve j
l 11,
j operating practices, or whatever may be necessary, but that 12 is the prudent thing to do.
13 l i
l COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Mayne, I think you've l
14 r i
answered one question that's been troubling me.
We do not i
i.
15 '
know what accounts for those extremely high levels in that 16 l water.
We don't know hov it's getting there, whether it's i
17 '
fallout -- Is that even possible?
18 4R. KERR:
Yes, it's definitely possible that it's 19 coming from the air.
New I did make scre inquiries --
20 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
And how :.s it getting in:0 e.1,
the water that's used --
n, se MR. KERR:
Well, it 's an unknown.
I tell you, one
. a.
question I did ask of the EPA pecple and others about,
~<
because -- to get rif of the possibility, is there an
,.,w,,,,,,,,,,,,ne,
..e 4
282 144
,45 j,wb 47 i
I l'
"ucson relies heavily on deep wells.
I understand i.
2/
the city water engineer, whatever his title might be, in i.
4J' Tucson said that the water is very, very old water.
That l
4 is, it's been down there a long time, like 5000 years, 5
and it does not recharge readily.
That would seem that that 6
is probably not a pathway.
But it still then leaves the I
7l question.
,n 8 !
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Does that food plant next to 9
them use a well for its water?
Well, the wells feed a city water II '
supply around the city --
i I2 l COMMISSIONER AEEARNE:
Okay, so it's a city water l
13 !
supply.
j I#
MR. KERR:
Yes.
f 15 So, you know, I think that that may have been i
16 eliminated, as f ar as underground to the well, but it still 17 raises the question:
Is it all coming just from the effluent, i
I3 )i the deposits to the swimmin9 pool?
Or it goes in air intakes 19 into the food plant?
i 20 '
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
That wouldn't get it into al l the plant anless it's --
,,. I
" 's MR. KIRR:
Well, into ventilation into the food plant, see, it could cc=e in there.
'a But, acain, the workers may be going home and
,;,eerni a.wrms. me. l
-e swimming --
282 145
46 jwb 48 i
l 6
1!
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
But how does that get it i
1 I
2 into the water in the food plant?
3l MR. KERR:
I don't know.
See, we don't --
i l
4l COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Does that pretty wcil j
i 1
5' bring us no to date?
i i
f i
1 6l MR. KERR:
I think that covers most of it.
j i
7j COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I have a question, then,
[
l 1
3; which is:
What did we do in qualifying or checking the I
i 9,
cualifications of Ari:cna in carrying out its resconsibilities
(
10 under the Agreement program?
11 MR. KERR:
Well, we, you know, have in all caLes I
i i
12 l reviewed all these programs annually, with rare exceptions.
j 1
i 13 l COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Well, let me sharpen that i
I i
14 l up a little bit.
I 15
- Bob referred to the Arizona Commission as having l
16 responsibilities both of a regulatory nature and other 17 responsibilities, as well.
And that posing a problem.
la,
Now that situation has been there for scme time.
19 ]
Did that have any effect on our decisions in qualifying taem?
i 20 l 33, graa:
30:
l 21!
MR. RYAN:
It was the Atomic Energy Commission l
22 ]
which accepted the Agreement State status in 1967, and I 23 think you could make the argument tha: the Atomic Energy
", s Cc= mission didn't --
vJec eral Aeoorters. Inc. I i
- C (Eaughter.)
r) n
)L L
,47 jwb 49 i
1 MR. RYAN:
We really don't look to the setup, the 2
organizational setup of an Agreement State, and that is a 3'
matter wnica I think is properly within the purview of the l
l 4
state.
I 5
What I think we do look to, and should look to, i
6 is whether the program is protective of the public health l
7l.
and safety, and that is a matter which we inquire into in i
i 3
cur annual reviews of the program.
9 I should point out to you, by the wt /, that I've I
10 had a recent petition from the Environ =c'tal Policy Center I
11 '
suggesting that the Arizona program -- by tne way, this i
i i
12 '
antedates the June 1 transaction -- suggesting that the I
I 13 Arizona Atomic Energy Commission and Agreement State Program l
i Id is not protective of the public health and safety, and 15 therefore ought to be revoked.
16 We have made no determination on the merits of 17 that issue.
It is premature, it seems to me, for us to 13 inquire into that question until we have the ulti. mate dispo-19 sition of this matter by the Atomic Energy Commission.
I 20 '
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
When was the last time we 21 passed on their qualifications?
o 22 MR. KERR:
I think at the staff level we reviewed 23 them in January of this year, and we have some comments to 2#
them, but we expressed the staf f opinion that, you knew, f3fderal R epor'erl, l *C, MC there's where we were at, but we did have comments.
282 14/
48 i,wb 50 i
I l i COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Is the paper in prepaLation i
i 2
now?
3 MR. KERR:
Yes, under preparation.
The paper that i
4 comes to the Commission is always behind because it covers l
1 i
5!
the calendar year period, and it's not up yet, i
t l
6l COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Could you just give me some l
7 indication of what you do when you go through this?
Is there 1
8 /
ayearly assessment?
.I c
1 9
MR. KERR:
Yes, it's been more or less yearly, and I
lo in an occasional state where there's been a problem like we i
I l
II l had with Washington a year and a half ago, we went back a 12 !
few months later.
We have another one this year, which we'll I
l I3 go back on certain limited aspects of the program, not all Id aspects, in another couple of months, probably, before we i
i 15 make a final staff position.
16 f COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
But what does it involve?
I7 Is there a sice visit?
Do you examine the records?
I8 {
MR. KERR:
Yes.
We go, and we review them in 19 accordance with a guide that covers six major areas.
How i
20 they are organized -- that is, structure within their l
'1',
l program, who cues their training, does tn.e material, anc new n
92 l the,<1ncs anc numbers o: people, scme of their many people, 3, j up, :ne status or tnear ac=1nistrative procecures set
-~
os ;
.1 Fecera! A morters, 'mc..
~
and then heavv on licensinc and compliance.
And
^ '
reculation,
~
4
.c we do review a number of license files.
Granted, we don't 909
~dO LUL lnO
49 jwb 51 I
have the time to make, you know, an indepth review like
!2l we're doing, you know, if we're doing our own, but we look I
3 to see that they're hitting the major elements of concern, inspection and enforcement action, and we go with inspectors l
4 5!
in most states yearly, in some small states we do not go I
6:
- yearly, i.
7 If we ' ve gone with the key guy that 's doing i
I 8;'
inspections last year and he seemed to be doing okay, we i
9 probably will skip a year in between.
l i
i 10 But it does call for looking at a number or II license files, and inspection files, and accompanying them i
1 12 on inspections.
l I3 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Do these assessments result 5
Id l in some recuired actions on the part of the states, i
15 '
sometimes?
I f
l 16 MR. KERR:
Well, Commissioner, as you probably 1,',I know, and I'll refresh v.ou, that our pcwers are larc.eiv.
i I8 zersuasive with the state.
It's that kind of an arrancement.
r
'l I9 We expect that they're fellow regula crs trying to do a 1
20 j decent j ob, we think, and we give them comments that we J.
2I thi st. they can benefit from from cur experience, and wha we see.
1 282 149 22 "
And we sent them a couple c ' letters, one from 1
,.i the Procram Director, and one in this case to Chairman Willis
~
eJecers Aeoorters, Inc. I Sc of the Commission, asking -- or telling ther our recop.mendatiens
52
.50 jub I
r I
i l
I 1j and we ask them to give us some reply to it.
\\
i 2'1 MR. RYAN:
States usually take these suggestions i
3 very seriously.
I 4I COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Do you deal with the 1
I I
5!
go'.ernor in these matters?
Or with --
l 6,
MA. RYAN:
No, we usually deal with the department i
i 7!
head in the -- that, by design, anywa y, on the tnecry that i
l 3l if we don't have any immediate response to our uggestior 3, l
i 9'
then the next order is to appeal to the governor.
j l
I 10 l We had that situation a year and a half ago in l
i II !
Washington State, where we made a determination that the i
12 i program, as operated at the time of our visit, was not i
13 adequat.e to protect public health and safety.
14 We brought this to the attention of the governor, i
l I
15 !
and forthwith the freeze was lif ted on hiring, and eight 16 !
new people appeared.
That was basically the problem.
17 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
When was this?
IS MR. RYAN:
This was -- Help me, Wayne.
19 l MR. KERR:
The review was November of
'77, and they a
.n I
20 ;l started taking action within a week or so to get additional 1
21 j positions and staff upr and we rereviewed Washington in
.iarch of '77 --
'78, I'm sorry, to follow up.
And in that
!I i
22 '
case, Mr. Ryan and I also went out and me with them almos:
i 24 '
at the same time, and they had improved dramatically in that
- J ed er al R eDor*ers, Inc. 1
- C Case.
Q Q 'i f ~
LU/
- l a' u
,51 jyb 53 Il i
1 CO?tiISSIONER AFLLTIE:
Did you see any problems in Arizona, when you reviewed them, that were significant?
i l
3i MR. KERR:
Let me see if I can find what we 4l' I
commented on, Commissioner.
I l
i, 5;i (Pause.)
I 6!
l To the chairman of the commission in January --
7l
~
this ycat, we i
i i
well, the letter went out February 1st, l
I 3I commented to the chairman that thev had imoroved their I
i i
9 1I staf fing level, but that we -- let's see -- taey were 10 improved on the inspection backlog.
The previous year they'd 11 l j
had quite an inspection backlog.
They have improved that.
l 12 '
l We -did say that we had some comments on the i
licensing area which were addressed to the program director.
13 14 That was Mr. Gilbert at the time.
And we laid out some 15,
co==ents to him.
I 16 j We did stress to Dr. Willis, though, that he ought 17 to consider what the impact was going to be on processi.g 18 h
uranium mill applications, because at that time they had a 1
19 '
l pending application, which at the moment is kind of in 20.l abeyance, but it pointed out to them the considerable 21 i=c.act that that does have on a state croc. ram.
g So !
COMICSSION'R AHEAR'IE :
- icthing that would be 9, a
^~!
related to this?
- 9. <
MR. KERR:
Nothing related to this one.
We did 3
w.i a eoo m ri inc.,
t
=.g review an amendment to the license.
During te
- e review, J
54 52 jwb I
I i
i e
I con't know the carticulars on that review, but I think, if l
~
'l I remember right, Commissioner, it had to do -- there was a 3)i comment developed about some of tne dose assessments from i
f l
4 r
the product, the manufactured product, which was an area 5
that we highlighted to.
+
l I
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I think Bill wanted to f
6 i
7 say something.
i l
8[
MR. DIRCKS:
I just wanted to clarify a point that 9,
j Commissioner Ahearne asked me a question about, Part 20, i
10 and how things would be different, and I mentioned worker i
11 1 exposure.
j i
i 12 i i
I think I should make clear that Dick Cunningham l
13 is down in Arizona.
He's testifying in support of the j
g I
14 i
Governor's order to shut the plant down, not only on the I
15 grounds of worker exposure, but on the ground that getting 16 l those limits down to an acceptable level, as Howard pointed l
17 '
out, under the regulation; and tnirdly, if we had a facility 13,
that was losing out the stack 20 to 25 percent of its 19.
curie inventory, we would ask the plant to close down, 3
20 because there's something wrong in there that we 'd wan: to 1
, l s, take a look at.
ti
.S.* n.
- l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes.
I was trying to, 23 A you know, pin down exactly what it is that we would be 24 "
ecer.i me:mn.rs. inc. jtaking action on.
And as far as I can tell, given the numbers 4s
,= i
..,i that have been talked about, since we haven't yet gotten ::
282 l h* P/
P s
55
.53 jwb g
1 any =easurement of worker exposure, ao f ar the only thing i
i l
2:
that one would say really looks bad is the huge amount of 1
1 I
3 loss, and the pusclement about how this stuff is then i
4l showing up in the system.
i 1
l 1
5 MR. DIRCKS:
That's right.
And I think this is j
l 6'
what --
t 7
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
But as far as the basic i
i 8;
numbers are concerned, I haven't yet t
l i
9j MR. DIRCKS:
Well, the basic numbers are what's 10 given ir. the Part 20, and those are high numbers, and I think l Il I that's why we ' ve been, in our own licensing practices, I
I i
12 '
working on the ALARA principle to get them down as low as i
13 is achievable.
i l
i 14 I think the point is that, on this plant, we would, 15 becauce those losses are so high, th
's something going on i
16 '
in that plant that we 'd want to take a look at.
And the only 17 !
way to take a look at it is to stop the operations.
a 13 j
' COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I'm just trying to draw a I?
distinction though between that, which I fully understand, a
l 20 and between saying that here is a number which, you know, t
21 ",
something like the 417,000 picocuries per liter in the t
,,1 swimming pool.
1 23 l MR. DIRCKS:
Yes.
a
,o CCMMISSIONER KZNNEDY:
Ynich is a number which in q
1Jecerai A eNrters, Inc. *
- C itself is evidence of danger to the public health and safety.
I 901 1 r j-L U /i JJ
56 54 iwb r
I t
I COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Well, it's a nunber which 2
indicates there's stuff getting into the water.
But since i
3l it's so 'ar below our limit --
i 4
MR. DIRCKS:
The limit in the standard, but not i
I L
5' the --
l I
6l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
If our limit -- you know, l
1 I
7!
our limit may be wrong.
But at least as far as --
I i
8!
MR. DIRCKS:
Well, I think the Part 20 is a l
9' regulation that has been looked at.
When did it come into i
10 l
effect?
1957 or something like that?
It was changed in i
II
'61.
I don't think it's been revised since then.
So I l
12 '
think it's on the work plan of the Standards of fice.
It's l
I 13 a long way off.
l Id MR. SEAPAR:
01 course it was based on the Federal l
l i
15 :
Radiation Council guidance, and the ICRP and the NCRP.
l 16 :
MR. DIRCKS:
And a lot of it is tied up with the I7{
new Clean Air Act Amendments.
They're waiting for that to I3 y
sort out.
1 19 i COMMISSIONER 3RADFORD:
Has anybody calculated the i
20 f population dose, if in fact they lost 243,000 curies a year?
r
't
'l i MR. KERR:
No, sir.
. i, i
COMMISSIONER 3RADFORD:
Can that be done?
i 23 1 MR. KERR:
After considerable work, I think it can, i
24 ves.
4Jecerai aeooners inc. !
ec COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Ecw long -- Now you mentioned
]
282 i54
55 jwb 57 i
I earlier that they have to report to Oak Ridge.
i o
MR. KIRR:
Yes, sir.
3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
So do we have a record l
4 going back now se.veral years of this kind of loss reported?
l l
5 MR. KERR:
I don't think so.
The first thing is, 6
the expanded tricium operation -- this company has been in i
I 7'
business for some time.
They originally ste.rted heavy in i
8 krypton R&D, then they moved into the tritium area, and it i
i 9
started to increase in about
'75.
10 As I understand, the big releases are primarily l
li l late '77 and perhaps through '78 and now
'79.
i i
12 l The reporting requirement to Oak Ridge is in 13 l 10 CFR Part 150.
I'm not sure that very much is done with l#
those reports, currently.
It's an NRC requirement on state 15 licensees, and it was picked up from that.
That was the t
16 first indication of the big losses.
The state has to have l
a copy of it.
I8 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
They were reporting, to i
19 )
seet our requirement.
What do we do with the reports once a.
20 j1 to Oak Ridge?
-ney get
, ).]
4 MR. KERR:
It's my understanding that not much has
,, :l been done with them.
23 COMMISSIONER ?. HEARSE:
Is that equrzalent to n,
"nothinc"?
.tNers R ecor ers, tre.,
i'
,c MR. EERR:
ProbablV.
~
282 155 a
i
56 jwb 58 i
i.
i l
1 MR. DIRCKS:
I think that's a reporting requirement i
2 that DOE has asked us to levy on our licensees.
I think q
1 3f it's more related to safeguards requirements than it is to I
4l health and safety.
I I
5 liR. SEAPAR:
Well, it's got to be related to l
i l
6 !
safeguards, because we've turned over authority on health i
i I
7; and safety to the states.
So it is a safeguards requirement.
I Bj COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I see, t
9l COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Is this company doing l
I 10 l anything else?
II MR. KERR:
Yes, sir, Commissioner.
They do have I2 other things authorized.
The state's order affects I
I 13 primarily this heavy tritium operation.
They run a waste 14 pickup operation, if you know what I mean.
They collect l
15 packaged waste, and so forth, and then af ter they get 16 i truckloads together, send it on elsewhere.
17 They do some R&D work.
They still do some krypton 13 work.
And, you know, there's an assortment of cther smaller d
l9 l quantities of material on this license, and perhaps scme i
I SQ l otner.
i I
,l The only part that's 'ceen affected by the order 22 is the tritium processing operation.
23 MR. RYAN:
Well, I should say, in ny judgment, the J
i i"
74 state has taken the proper action.
I think Bill spoke of
..:,eers a.wners. inc. i 2',
the Governor's order closing it down.
It's my understanding 282 156 i
57 jwb 59 l
i i
I 1'
that it was the Atomic Energy Commission, as distinguished i
i 2 i from the Governor, although the Governor did recommend the I
i 3
closedown to the Atomic Energy Commission when he returned 4
to Arizona on Friday of last week.
5 The proper steps have been taken, and I think we I
i 6;
can sort out the pathway in due course, and at the same time, 7l' not have to worry about the continuing contamination of food 8
and foodstuffs in the plants which are operating adjacent 9
to this facility.
10 l COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Let's see.
I don't have 11 l any questions on this subject for the moment.
l l
12 I would like to hear what you --
i 13 MR. KERR:
Would you like copies of the order?
i l
14 I've brought some copies of the Arizona order, and the charge 15,
that was presented at the hearing.
I i
16 i COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I'd like to ask Bill some i
17 more questions.
13 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Sore.
19 l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE :
Bill, you mentioned worker
+
20.
e.xro s are.
Is that based un.on scme data?
Or is it based
.I 21 /
upon this very large loss rate?
I i
22 ]
MR. DIRCKS:
I just got that over the phone from 23 Cunningham, and I assume it's some data that he's picked
'l 24 ap down there, y
- 0er3 Reporters, Inc, 25 MR. KERR:
Well, I have knowledge of it, yes.
I 282 157
60 58 jwb i
I i
l 1:
have in the document that the state had that they know that t
8 2]
an overexposure shown by concentrations in the urine of a 3l worker.
It's my uncerstanding that since that report was
(
4l written there may be another one that is of pretty substantial !
I i,
5l size.
There are some others that appear to go over, on a l
l 6
one-time basis, for a very short time, and they tal:e them t
7; off the work -- you know, for a while, and then thev put l
i 8'
them back to work.
I 9j There are some occucational exoosures.
Now in 10 t the statement of charges that was presented at the hearing i
11 !
by the State on Saturday, however, they withdrew -- the l
12 ;
attorneys did -- the charges on the overexposures, because I
I' 13 the individual involved is in litigation with the company.
14 So they withdrew them from the State -- under' their notice i
15 !
of hearing, the charges on the grounds that they were 16 presented to the commission.
17 j COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
In litigation with the 4
18 ]
company in what regard?
l lo i tiR. KERR:
Well, I guess he's filing a suit.
n
'l 20 !
MR. DIRCKS:
He's suing.
21 !
MR. KERE:
I t hink he 's suing the company,
o MR. DIRCKS:
He's suing for damages.
22 ll i
I 23 U MR. KERR:
He's a former employee, as I understand.
N 24 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Bill, do we have any e.;ecerai aeoor ers. inc.,
^
25 neasurement around the other -- the New York and Pennsylvania f
'd 282 158
61
,59 "wb J
r 1l j
plants, ground water, anyth _.'g like tf ati e
MR. DIRCKS:
In the environmental samples?
I'll i
have to ask Randy or Nat that question.
This is Randy Miller who's the branch chief.
i Sl MR. BASSIN:
Well, I can tell you because I was I
i t
i6' just there.
When we got up there, U.S. Radium had heard 1
i 7'
l about the situation at American Atomics, and before we could i
l 1
3' i
l ask them, they volunteered the fact tha t they were going i
i t
9i to go out and being doing environrental sampling.
I s'
10 i I
And I understand that, as a followup, Region 1 is 11 l' l
going to be making some independent ceasurements.
l i
12 '
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I think your response is 13 we don't have any?
l 14 i
MR. BASSIN:
No, right now we have no measurements.
i 1S l It was not a requirement.
16 !
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
How about around the New I
17 York?
18 MR. RYAN:
New York is an Agreement State.
19 MR. SASSIN:
New York 13 an Agreemen: State.
1 20 '
l MR. RYAN:
And I've talked to Sherwood Davies,
'l l
^
who heads the Radiation proc. ram.
I cuess it was about two j
" ]
weeks ago.
It was when this matter was coming ap.
But they
,- i AJ +
are worried in New York about the tritium problem, and he i
.i "4
called me to ask me whether NRC coulf supply a representative
.+-ee.ro a.:orms. i nc.
,e a to a task force, an ad hoc task force loo ~ a; ;his problem,
'39 U #
60 iwb 62 I
i i
I 1 I and reporting back to the director of the state's i
2i Commission of Health.
I t
i 3!
And our answer was:
Yes, we would supply someone, 4;
and as a matter of fact I got a letter from the Director of l
l 1
S-i Health today telling us that the meeting was going to be on l
L 6
the 25th and asking who it will be.
l 7
MR. KERR:
Let me add, they do have numbers.
8 They have had some concentration in the Sawmill' River, and i
i l
9; we had sent up a notice on that company --
i 10 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
What kind of concentration?
Il j MR. KERR:
Let me look up my note, if I may, on 12 which one it is.
l I3 (Pause.)
l l
I4 I must say, they're, I think, at an earlier stage 1
15 or some of their investigation -- although it started sometime,
r i
10 l March 2nd we sent up a notice, 7906, about elevated ago.
17i tritium in the stream samples.
One sample contained tritium la at a level of right at the MFC for of f-site water --
I lY COMMISSIONER A'iEARNE:
Which is?
20 1 MR. KERR:
Which, in a stream run by the plan'. --
2I COMMISSIONER A'4EARNE:
You mean the 3 million?
3
-a" MR. KERR:
10 microcuries, yes, it would be i
23I 3 times 10, that's right.
That's right, 3 million.
a f
4 l Other samples contained lesser concentrations, 4
..,eerni a cconers, inc. i I
9C but elevated over those expected.
I might add, in New York
,i e
=
282 16U
63
,61 j,wb I
t 1!
it gets complicated.
You've got more than one agency l
2[
involved.
The New York Department of Labor, which licenses 3'
them for in-house, on Thursday, I understand, instructed 4,
the company to cut off receipt of bulk shipments of gaseous 1
S tritium until they can further evaluate handling procedures i
6 in that plant.
Because they have had recent requests for l
i 7l increased production levels, and they are reassessing some I
I 8
of their --
i 9!
COMMISSIONER AHEAPSE:
So the New York number, the i
10 l latest that you have is at the 3 million picocuries per liter?
II I Of course that's in the river.
l 12I MR. KERR:
That's the only one, Commissioner, I i
13 can confidently say --
l i
I4 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
You don't have any measure-i 15.
ments around the plant?
1 16 l MR. KERR:
They do have.
They have some others, 17 but I must say I'm not that current on it because they're o
13
in the process o
- working with this company on, you know, i
I9 i where they stand.
d a
20 "
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
My last question:
Ecb, in 21 talking with EPA, did EPA nention that they had giver you these measurements?
i 23 MR. RYAN:
No, the EPA had given the measurements i
- J^.1 to the Arizona cfficials, and they passed them en to us.
weee,.iaewn.,s.me.l
-e COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Lo you knew whether EPA 9
0 21 L
L U
62 iwb 64 e
reached a -- had a position on the significance of the l
2l measurements?
MR. RYAN:
I'll turn that over to Wayne.
3 1
4l Alan Mochissi from EPA was out there.
I don' t know whether t
1
?
l 5l he actually testified.
l i
6 MR. KERR:
Alan had not appeared yet.
In fact, 7
I'm not sure his deposition has been completed.
He was i
8:
there certainly on Saturday for the hearing, and will be l
9!
there in the one that resumes tomorrow.
10 He is going to talk about:
What do the numbers i,
11 !
mean?
What do they mean in terms of doses for people, and i
i i
12 things like that?
He is a rather noted tritium expert in I
I I
13 this country.
i 14 I do not know what his conclusion might be in 15,
terms of overall significance.
16 MR. RYAN:
I have some hearsay on that, because 17 while I was with Governor Babbitt last Wednesday, he talked 18 to the attorney frem the Attorney General's office who will g
io 19 !
be handling the matter, a fellow by the name of " Silver,"
20 '
and Silver cid Babbitt, Governor Babbitt, tha Alan Moghissi 21,
will testify that there is a serious health problem, and a t
i 22,1 problem of great immediacy, by '.irtue of these high readings 23 l off-site.
1 a
24 COMMISSICNER KENNEDY:
He will testify?
e ;ecerai Aeoor*ers. Inc. r 25i MR. RYAN:
That's what Silver -- as : say, it's 282 162
, 6 3 j wb 65 I
l i
i 1t i
thirdhand.
Silver's conversation with Moghissi relayed to i
2I Governor Babbitt.
I 3l MR. SEAPAR:
Of course that's probably one of the I
l jI main things the court will be determining maybe this afternoon 1
5I' in its decision.
i MR. RYAN:
That's right.
7;'
i MR. KERR:
But the court was meeting before further i
8l testimony.
9l I
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Does that do it?
I 10 '
We've also been invited to testify next Monday 11 1 i
before Mr. Udall on this subject, and the State Agreement l
12 ;
programs in general.
l i
l 13 MR. RYAN:
Right.
l 14 i
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I wonder if you could just i
15 briefly teli us your plans for complying with that request.
16 l MR. RYAN:
There are three governors who will be 17 )
testifying, to my knowledge, Commissioner -- the Governor of i
18 Kentucky, the Governor of North Carolina, and the Governcr of 19 3 I
Ariscna --
i.
20 1 MR. GOSSICK:
Well, they, or their representatives.
71
^
I'm sure that the governors --
q e, o
..n j
MR. RYAN:
I had heard that it was the governors 1
71
^~
who will be testifying.
That's the indication I have.
24 !
CIMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
The governcrs were invited.
t wecerei neponers, in,..l
..c MR. RYAN:
Governor Babbitt's i.- - wn.
f-d Ob
66 64 jwh l
l i
If At any rate, the subject, I think, was not 2,
originally planned for this time by the committee.
Some 3l' other hearing which they had scheduled has fallen through 4
and they decided to concentrate on this one, and we've given I
I5' you an outline of what our proposed testimony would look i
6' like.
i t
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
And will there be testimony l
8; from state programs?
l 9'
MR. GOSSICK:
Yes, the intent -- our plan here, i
10 i unless the Commission de6 ides --
I i
.II COMMISSIONER GILINSKf:
And what about NMSS?
I 12 l l
MR. GOSSICK:
- Yes, Mr.- Dircks will be there, but 1
13 -
no prepared testimony.
As I understand the subject, it is l
1.1 l l
just covering the state programs.
i 15 :
Our plan was to have Bob, and Wayne, and Bill 16 !
Dircks go down on the 25th.
17' MR. RYAN:
I'm sure Mr. Cunningham would like to 13 be there, too.
1 19 MR. GOSSICK:
Yes, with any other staff.
I 20 '
l COMMISSICNER KENNEDY:
If he's back?
i 71 1 MR. GOSSICK:
Yes, if he's back.
s. ',,
COMMISSIGNER GILINSKY:
Could we see a draft of n'
that testimony?
l 2d 3 eectra' A tocrters. Inc. '
MR. RYAN:
Sure.
We have one workin~ now.
I'r D
+
w..
sCrry I couldn't bring it ovar.
You'll have it tomorrow.
282 164
67
.65 jwb I,
i 11 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
At some early date?
Good i
2; enough.
3!
Le can then comment on it?
i l
4!
MR. RYAN:
Sure.
l t
i I
l 5!
MR. GOSSICK:
Incidentally, that same letter l
l 1
l 6,
addresses a hearing on Thursday, the 2 8 th.
They're getting i
}
7 into, again, state-related matters having to do with the i
a waste Cisposal.
And in talking with Bill Dircks, it seems l
i t
I 9,
to me that it's probably more appropriate to have Bill as a i
l 10 witness on that with Bob as backup --
l 11 !
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Ti t -t is which one?
i l
i I
12 MR. GOSSICK:
On Thursday, on the hearing where l
l I
13 4 they're going to get into the repository waste -- repository l
14 l siting and licensing, and the role of public participation i
15 l mechanisms for state participatica and so forth.
\\
16 l COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
What is this Item 3, 17'
" License Issued to Finley C. Watts"?
13 MR.
KIRR:
Yes, that's right, I wrote that en 19 j there.
When I originally get the cral notice abou: this, I
i 2C I was asked -- there were three problem cases, Yankee 1
2
Flats, American Atomics, and Tennessee Watch, which was 22 referred to in Mr. Udall's attachment to his letter about a J'l 23 Wilkesboro, North Carolina, icw-level burial ground, and it's j
1 1
24 :
not a icw-level burial ground, it is again a waste-collection 1.%,, ae:er ers me. !
25l type agency, and it had generated some citizen concerns dcwn 282 165
66 jwb 68 l
l I
11 l
there.
2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
That's Tennessee Watch?
t 3i j
MR. KERR:
Yes, Tennessee Watch was the person the I
si l
license was issued tc.
l i
i
$l
~
l MR. REAN:
Here 's the question:
"What, if any, t
6!
has been the Commission's involvement in the situation i
.i
'l involving the siting anc licensing of a icw-level waste i
I 0l burial ground in North Wilkesboro, North Carolina?
To what 9'
extent under the Agreement State Program does the Commission 1
1 10 -
require or reconmend procedures in states for public I
i 11 1 l
participation in siting and licensing activities?"
t 12 CCMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Okay.
Well, I think i
13 i
we'll bo in a better position to comment on tne testimony I
i 14 l l
when we've ceen it.
1 ~e l
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
What is the stand, at the 16 moment?
Has Governor Babbitt followed through any further 17 '
on this possibility of asking us to take back any of the --
18 MR. RYAN:
No, he hasn't.
And I take it, 19 Cc=missicner, that's because the plant is shut down.
20 I I
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Have we ever taken back an l
21 'l Agreement State?
.i on '
^^
MR. RYA'I :
No.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Do we have any process laid 24 out to go about making that kind of an action?
t etCfr31 a tDor'ert, Inc.,
4 MR. RYAN:
The 010sest thing we can come to is that 282 166
67 jwb 69 11 statement from the Conmission in the Michigan letter about i
2 ji mutuality of termination.
I don't think i t'; a lively r
3' l
possibility, quite frankly.
I 4
MR. SEAPAR:
Except there is one dif ference now, i
5t fairly recent.
For the first time we have authority to I
I 6-terminate part of a prograa.
We never had that authority i
7'!
before.
No one at least has focused on it up to now.
I I
S I MR. KERR:
Let me comment on that.
When he says l
9i "part of a program," he means a category of material.
There 10 l are four cateceries of radioactive materials in the act now.
i 1
i MR. SEAPAR:
Yes.
\\
12 1 MR. KERR:
We're not talking an individual i
l 1
i l ~'
l license --
14 MR. SEAPAR:
There is one other c. oint that is I
15 l interesting and related.
And that is, the significance i
16 '
of these annual redeterminations.
It's the basis on which 17 '
the Departnent of Labcr does not exercise current authority t
18 1
that it has to promulgate regulations.
Thev in effect 19 1 rely on the annual redeterninations of ccmpatibility and i
20 "'
adequacy which the NRC nakes.
3 i
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
That is something -- I
,q de '
was a little concerned about something that Wayne Kerr said, 1
e
'3 r!
you were reminding ne that we could only cersuade states tc
^
i 4
i we are passing nere en One imereve tae r crogram, cut f *Tctral A eporters, t elC. !
q 9
~
adequan9bH
'l b [
25 l adequacy of their program.
If it's not
70 68 jwo i
i we have authority to terminate the 1'
MR. SHAPAR:
l.
2 l!
program.
3, MR. RYAN:
And I assure you that I would recommend i
i 4:
such a thing if we were in a position where we found i
i l
I i
5' something not adequate to protect the public health and l
{
6 s afe t;r.
l 7
MR. SEAPAR:
And even though we enter into the j
+
i 8
agreement on grounds of both compatibility and adequacy, I
9 strangely enough the statute provides authority only --
l 10 '
asida from the uranium mill tailings thing -- authority only l
II l to terr.inate on grounds of adequm. / and not compatibility.
j l
i 12 l W though the Commission in the past has said that if at any i
1 I3 I time it felt the state c.rogram was not conc _ atible, it would I
I
.d ;
do everyvain'g in its power to achieve compatibility, includingI t
II perhaps seeking legislation.
16 l COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Well, "ccmpatibility" could 17 be one of the aspects of adequacy.
18 MR. SEAPAR:
Yes, but they treat it as two separate l 9 l, twin concec.ts in the statute.
And vou need both to enter i
20 l into the agreement, but the only grounds for revecction in ej context is the adequacy.
4 i
t I
3, -]
CO.WISSIONER AHEARNE:
Well, Sch, let us suppose i
23 ^
that, if one looked at the Oak Ridge data, thst one found l
"4 that this plant really had been losing 100,000, 150,000
- e ?ecerai reocrms, in:.,
~c Curies a quarter.
Would that lead you tO the conclusion that 282 168
69 jwb 71 1l
~
perhaps you ought to take a harder look at Arizona, with i
2i i
the possibility of --
l MR. RYAN:
Sure it would.
~
4 I feel very strongly about the health and safety I
5 l
I of these people out there, and that's one of the reasons we l
61 sent une telegram and did what we did when we did it.
7' COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Why don't we get the Oak l
2 I
Ridge data in here, then?
3, i
9i MR. RYAN:
We can.
I guess -- Wavne, vou' ve c.otten 10 some it, have you not?
I 11 MR. KERR:
I'm not very familiar with that process.
s 3
i 12 '
I An NRC inspector from Region 5 was with me, a safeguards i
I 1 '-
inspector.
I was with him Saturday and Friday night, and I
14 he said he is going to, you know, talk to Oak Ridge some 15 '
i about this.
I 16 'l I understand they get reports out on certain kinds 17 of materials, special nuclear material data --
18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Sure, I can understand --
19 MR. KERR:
And I guess he wasn't sure, you know, 20 what to do with t
n :t f f.
r
'l
^
CCM
'2EARNE:
What I'm really saying is t.
that it ac.cea_&
'ha Mre's a n.ossibilinv. that at least --
a 3
~~ j at least in their inspection of this kind cf facility, that a
3.,
a the Arizona pr'.7 ram really has a serious prchlen.
seer, i aeoorms, me.
,e
~ 'ys=.
D a ' s..
Q l G.
sa ;
s, * :
~ ~- g. s G,
>.s.
i
170 jwb 72 I
I COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Which would appear that if i
1 2l we checked the Oak Ridge data and find that it's been existing :
1 3l for a long time, maybe you ought to consider at least i
i 4
revoking --
l' 5
MR. RYAN:
I'm prepared to make such a recommenda-6 tion if I'm convinced that the program is not adequate to i
7 protect the public health and safety, and I assure you I l
8i will do it without the droo of a hat.
I i
)
9 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
That you would make a 10,
recommendation.
i 1
11 MR. RYAN:
That's what I said.
I2 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Bob, have you ever 13 recommended to an Agreement State before that they close a l
3 I#
facility down?
15 !
MR. RYAN:
I can' t think o f one.
l 16 I' Wayne, in your experience in the past, have we I7' come to that juncture?
I8 i
MR. KERR:
I can't remember, Commissioner, whether 19 '
we've -- we've never done it in the format that we've done
'O ]
it here.
'l' MR. RYAN:
Macke Flats?
i' MR. KERR:
Well, no, I don't think we recommended
,, i Macke Flats, but --
1
,*i MR. GCSSICK:
I seem to recall one, but I can't
, :.eerai newneri ire. q
,e 1
-~ '
pinpoint it.
It was about three years ago, or there was l
282 1TO
71 jwb 73 I
some licensee, but I just don't recall the details.
I 1
4 2l MR. SHAPAR:
I think it only fair to say, tnougn, i
3 that the ambiance and the ethic of looking at these t
4j agreements in the past may not be identical to the ambiance l
i I
5i and ethics of today.
l l
6, COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
My next question was going
,1
/ i to be whether the recommendation had ever been rejected i
i i
8' before.
i t
i 9l Lee, in the case that you remember, was it accepted?
I 10 MR. GOSSICK:
As I recall, it was shut down, yes.
l 11 MR. RYAN:
As a general proposition, Commis s.:.o ne r,
12 l I think that the Agreement States pay very strict attention 13 to our suggestion.
Id Let me give you an example.
Condition uranium mill 15 licenses on the outcome of the generic environmental impact I
16 '
statement.
The contents of the generic environmental impact 17' statement, it was completely unkncwn.
We had not begun to i
IU set pen to paper.
I1
'l We asked the Agreement States wherein mills are d
i 20 i operating to condition licenses which may be granted between i
91 '
1 that date and the time that the statement came out on the 7
outccme of an unknown piece of paper, and they said "right on;
..,I we'll do it."
24 1 COMMISSIONER GILISSKY:
You're coing to have a draft
,.werei aeww. inc. i for us tomorrow?
j
74
' 7 2, j,wb.
\\
i i
1 MR. RYAN:
That will be tomorrow.
2 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Very good.
I 3'
Thank you.
4 (Whereupon, at 4:37 p.m.,
the meeting was 5
adjourned.)
f
?
I 6
I i
7 l
8!
i 9
i l
10 i
i 4
l 11,
i 12 i
I 13 l
14 l
I I
IS 16 17 :
la l ll 1
19 i
- i 20 '
f l
21 ]
22 ]
23 z-i
..sece o me:mners. inc. I 282 i/2 25 ','