ML19308C032
| ML19308C032 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 01/07/1980 |
| From: | Gotchy R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Illoway E PEPPER, HAMILTON & SHEETZ |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8001180031 | |
| Download: ML19308C032 (2) | |
Text
4
.W
- s
g, f
UNITED STATES y ",
,[ }
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
%.....f JAN 0 71980 Ms. Eleanor Morris Illoway Pepper, Hamilton & ScheeM 123 South Broad Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvan-19109
Dear Ms. Illoway:
This is in response to your telephone calls and letter of December 21, 1979, regarding public risks from the Three Mile Island accident releases reported at the December 7, 1979 meeting of the American Industrial Hygiene Association in Philadelphia. In my presentation, I provided a table of mortality risks equivalent to the lifetime mortality risk resulting to a child following in utero exposure (the maximum risk).
A copy of that table is encloseE I also pointed out that the lifetime mortality risk for in utero exposure to 69, millirem (maximum observed for the general public) Tould be about the same as if the mother had spent her 9 months of pregnancy living in Denver. Similarly, the lifetime mortality risk following in utero exposure to 1.5 millirems (average dose to the population living within 50 miles) would be about the same as if the mother had flown to a Colorado ski resort for a weekend of skiing in her first trimester of pregnancy
'd (e.g., before she know she was pregnant). The higher radiation doses from living in Colorado come from higher cosmic ray doses (increase with elevation) and terrestrial doses (higher levels of uranium, etc.).
In addition, round trip radiation exposure from cosmic rays during jet air travel to Colorado would be on the order of a couple millirem.
The additional maximum lifetime risk of cancer mortality (69 millirem) and the average risk (1.5 millirem) for the 50-mile population would be on the order of 2 chances in 100,000, and one chance in two-million, respectively. These can be compared with current normal expectations of cancer mortality, which are on the order of I chance in 5.
I hope this informati6n satisfies your needs.
Sincerely your,;s, A_
(),
y
=
R. L. Gotchy Senior Radiobiologist Radiological Impact Section, RAB Division of Site Safety and Environmental Analysis, NRR
Enclosure:
as stated 8001180 03l
Mr. R. Vollmer Page 2 TMI-I Liquid Waste Storage Capacity January ll, 1980 Your prompt review and concurrence of this request would be appreciated to expedite initiation of the process.
Sincerely,
'b l 4%
J. G. Herbein
[
Vice President Nuclear Operations JGH/ECF/ hah cc:
J. Collins D. Dilanni H. Silver
~
r O
n L.
Q Mortality Risks Numerically Equivalent to the Potential Risk of Mortality Associated with h Utero Radiation, Exposure Following The Three Mile Island Accident Equivalent Mortality Risks *
(1.5 millirem)
Type of (69 millirem)
Average for the Activity 0-1 Mile from THI-2 50 Mile Population Smoking 11 packs of cigarettes
~ l cigarette Drinking 10 bottles of wine
~ l glass of wine Automobile Driving 1,000 miles 23 miles Commercial Flying 5,000 miles 110 miles Rockclimbing for 30 minutes 41 seconds Canoeing for 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> 3 minutes Being a Man Aged 60 for 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> 9 minutes
- Sir Edward Pochin, "The Acceptance of Risk", Br. Med. Bull., Vol. 31, No. 3, pp 184-190 (1975) 9 6
.