ML19308E141
| ML19308E141 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 03/20/1980 |
| From: | May I AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8003240420 | |
| Download: ML19308E141 (2) | |
Text
.
STATEMENT AT THE MARCH 20, 1980 PUBLIC MEETING GJ THE TMI-2 PROGRAMMATIC EIS BY MR. IRA MAY ENVIRONMENTAL GE0 CHEMIST ANNANDALE, VA.
The reading of the materials available to the public concerning the programmatic Environmental Impact S ta temen t for the decontamination of TMI-2 leads the reader to ask if certain technical issues have been addressed:
(1)
What controls on the use of the Epicore 2 exchange resins will be in place?
Al though the use of these resins has been shown to be ef f icien t for the clearance of water of r ad ionucle ides besides tritium on a small scale; the resins have never been used on the large scale needed to decontaminate the water at TMI-2.
What assurance does the public have that the wa te r is being decon tamina ted as per spec if ica tions?
What safeguards will be in place during the changing of the resins af ter a period of operation?
What me thods of disposal have been developed for these resins containing highly concentrated nuclear was te produc ts?
These resins, if work ing at peak efficiency, will contain all the most harmful radionucleides from inside the containment building and will be just as harmful as the present water within the containment building.
(2)
What will be the tempera tu re at which tritiated water may be en tering the Susquehanna River?
While the ecological' effect of tritium is cons idered to be negligible at the concentrations presen tly being d is cus sed, the heated wa ter will be dilu ted at a much lower rate in the Susquehanna River.
This lower dilu tion ra te may lead to the transport of a highly tritiated water mass great dis tances downs tream with an ecological effect totally dif ferent f rom what would be predicted for water at lower temperatures.
(3)
How much of the radionucleides have seeped from the bu ilding in to the so il and ground water around the containment building?
The work of Dr. Dale Lewis (Lewis, D.M.
1977.
The use of 210Pb as a
heavy me tal tracer in the Susquehanna River sys tem.
Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta.
Vol. 41, p.
1557-1564) on the heavy metal transport in the Susquehanna River basin sugges ts a mean res idence time of 2,000 years for the heavy metals in soil profiles.
He fur ther sugges ts that heavy metals leached from soil profiles or otherwise introduced into the water column will qu ickly be incorporated in to the sed
?nt layer and re tained there.
The possibility of a highly radie ".tive sedinent plug-in the Susquehanna River and highly radic
- ive soil and ground water abou t the TMI plant should be inves
.ated in great detail.
(4)
What will the effect of - the tri tia ted iater be on the sediment column in the Chesapeake Bay?
While' the sediment column of the Chesapeake Bay is beginning to be un' e rs tood (see for O
B003g 40%
o example the review article by Goldberg, E.D.
et al. 1978.
A pollu tion his tory of the Chesapeake Bay.
Geochimica et cosmochimica Acta.
Vol.
42, p.
1413-1427),
the effect of low level, low linear energy transfer radiation such as tritium has not been s tud ied.
It is known, for ins tance, tha t the top 40 cm of the sediment column of the Chesapeake Bay are thoroughly mixed by bioturbation by burrowing mollusks and polychae tes.
Since the tr i tium will mix through time w i th all the water of the Chesapeake Bay, what effect will the tri tium in the in ters titu al water of the sediment column
( the top 40 cm) have on the biological lif e of the Chesapeake Bay?
(5)
What effect might the tritiated water to be released have on the ecology of the Chesapeake Bay?
For all practical purposes, tritium will be d is tr ibu ted evenly in water, including the water within the bodies of living organisms.
While tritium is not considered a serious hazard in drinking water (see the NAS document Drinking Water and Heal th 1977), the effect of tritium over long periods at above background levels has not been well s tu d ied in aquatic organisms.
These potential ef f ects should not be discounted during the environmental impact process.
(6)
What o the r decontamination and disposal me thods have been contemplated and discarded f or the water at TMI and why were they so discarded?
O ther me thods are possible for the disposal of the tritiated water, such as ocean dumping, evaporation, e tc.,
ra ther than disposal in the ra ther closed sys tem of the Susquehanna River and Chesapeake Bay.
The dec is ion-making process tha t led to the proposed decontamination procedure is presen tly unclear to the public; obviously more public scru tiny is called for in this situation.
(7)
What is the potential for further accidents?
Will the use of complica ted resin exchange systems lead to new acciden ts,
potentially as serious as the orig inal one which led to the crippling of the reactor?
(8)
What is the need for such a rapid cleanup of the acc ident site?
It would appear th at a
delay in ene decontamination procedure would lead to f ar saf er conditions; the tempera tu re of the reactor and the amount of rad ioac tiv i ty -
present should be continuously declining.
If a
rap id decontamination and cleanup is requ ired, this should be explained to the public; if ne t, less has te and more environmental s tudy would appear to be called for.
It is hoped th a t thes e issues and o thers men tioned during this public meeting will be addressed in the near fu ture so th a t the public can-be fully aware of all procedures being contemplated.
A project of such potentially far reaching environmental consequences should only be undertaken with comple te public conf idence.
Certainly public conf idence is dependent on a full awareness of all aspec ts of the procedures and decision making processes to be u s ed.