ML19332A202
| ML19332A202 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden, Indian Point, Zion, Crane  |
| Issue date: | 08/28/1980 |
| From: | Dircks W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Courter J HOUSE OF REP. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8009110218 | |
| Download: ML19332A202 (4) | |
Text
'
~
fh
~
DISirdsu i w, 50-320/50-3/50-237/50-286/
Dockets PPAS 50-295/50-304 #
NRC POR BSnyder
,3 g*
ts LPOR BGrimes WJDircks DEisenhut EDO R/F RVollmer HR0enton Dross
---f EGCase SHanauer t - - ::.e --
INGL"Ai.--"%.-..-U;il iOld..'i ;.:.i. UdE J.
WTRussel1 FSchrceder m--
PFine (NRR-9409)
ELD SCavenangh p
28 E NMSS TSB R/F RMinogue CCA t
, JCock i
SECY 80-1492 (R$
GErtter(NRR-9409)
~The Honorable Jim Courter United States House 'of Representatives
+.
Washington, D. C.
20515 Cear Congressman Courter:
Your letta.- of July 23,1980, to the Director of the Offica of Congressianal Affairs of the Nuclear, Regulatory Camission requested Assistance in answering questions from a constitutent of yours. Encicsec is pertinent information, which should be helpful.
Sincerely, i
TSigne@ 7. A. Rehm William J. Dircks kting Executive Director for Operations
Enclosure:
Questions and Answers
/
t h
OCA::g'[
$+
.)
8/.Sf80
/s e// {N >-
,A
/
,,NRR;.Isa //
NR.hS$:C ELD M ~ V Nk.
NRRg AEOD hee)nTcis"",",
PFine:p5~'"._'M Eisell"..................lQ.. ~.)f.t:'2]",,
'YGC
~ ' "
WiMI~
. 3/...,/.S0....
...81.tT1.?0........ 01/5289...... 81,..l.8.Q.
...8/.,qp ga.,,
,3/..../.10 t
m au m mn nm==
,8 0 0 9110 2; g kl
{
w
. i Questions and Answers 1.
With all the official concern expressed over exposure to radiation from the sun, x-rays, etc., how can venting of radiation from TMI be safe?
Attached is report NUREG-0673 of May 5,1980, entitled " Answers to questions About Removing Krypton from the Three Mile Island, Unit 2 Reactor Building," from the TMI Program Office of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Nuclear Regulatory Canmission. This was prepared prior to the venting of krypton from TMI.
The actual coera-tions have been successfully and safely completed. The amount of krypton vented to the atmosphere is estimated to be aoout 45,000 curies, which is appreciably less than the figure of 57,000 curies estimated in the report.
2.
What are the long-tenn effects of exposure to low-level raciation, and, if they are not known, why is the public being exposed? (The "supcosed" study of long term effects seem to hold up everything else such as beneficial disease preventatives or medications.)
Attached is an interview with Dr. Arthur C. Upton, Director of the National Cancer Institute, on " Low-Level Radiation" published in the Cancer Journal for Clinicians, Septemaer/ October 1979. Dr. Upton says in part: "Because we know radiation can do harm, and because we have no confidence in the existence of a tnreshold, we must do everything possible to minimize the unnecessary radiation exposure of patients.
I think we have developed enough information over the last 75 years to make it unlikely that we will underestimate the risks involved.
In any case, we must be as certain as possible that the benefits of ex-posure outweight any presumed risks."
3.
Is it true that after approximately 30 years of operation nuclear ;ower plants must be closed and sealed for over 200 years because of the accumulation of intense levels of radiation? Isn't this rather dangerous littering on a grand scale?
Wher.
quclear power plant has canpleted i:s service life, it may be dismantled immediately or it may be put in safe storage and dismantle-ment deferred until radioactivity has decreased significantly. Upon completion of dismantlement, it is assumed that the property will be released for unrestricted use. Both methods are discussed in the attached Summary of report NUREG/CR-0130, 'lol.1, on " Technology, Safety and Costs of Decommissioning a Reference Pressurized Water Reactor Power Station" frem Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratory, June 1978.
~,n.-
a,,,,..
..v.,
,,..-,~..n,
. ~..
,,,.e,
,en
~
4.
Where can nuclear waste be " safely" stored?
(When by present technology it can only be contained safely for 10-20 years and is active for up to one million years?)
Attached is a message of February 12, 1980, to the Congress f
from President Carter, stating that he is establishing a comprehensive radioactive waste management program.
He says that the capability now exists to characterize and evaluate a number of geologic environments for use as repositories built with conventional mining technology.
Why should I as a taxpayer have my hard-earned money be fed back 5.
to the nuclear power industry which I so strongly oppose?
The NRC was created by the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended, to license and regulate nuclear power as a " safe and reliable" alternative and not to promote nuclear power.
due to the Price-Anderson Act of 1957, the nuclear Is it true tha:
6.
industry is not liable for accide'nts and damages incurred?
Licensees'of commerical nuclear power plants having a rated No.
capacity of 100,000 electrical kilowatts or more are required to provide proof to the Nuclear Regulatory Cannission that they have financial protection in an amount equal to the maximum amount of liability insurance available at reasonable cost and on reasonable This amount is currently $160,000,000.
terms from private sources.
In addition, for each such plant a licensee provides $5,000,000 to a liability fund that totals $350,000,000 at present.
By law, the to reach Government provides the remaining indemnity of $50,000,000 the limit of $560,000,000.
but had If a meltdown had occurred at TMI, and if I ha'd sur/ived been forced to evacuate my home, would anyone reimburse me for my 7.
losses?
Following the advisory by the Governor of Pennsylvania that Yes.
pregnant women and pre-school age children living within a five mile radius of the Three Mile Island plant should leave the area,
'American Nuclear Insurers established a claims office to pay claims for living expenses for these people, as well as others who had The emergency claims center began special medical problems.
operation on March 31, 1979, the third day after the accident, and made payments on that day of almost $12,000.
The payments increased on April 9,1979.
daily until they reached a peak of about $167,000 As of June 1980, cumulative payments for evacuation expenses and
~
lost wages made to approximately 12,000 individuals were in excess of
$1,500,000.
3 8.
Isn't it true that a nuclear reactor at Indian Point in New York is built directly on a faultline in direct opposition to safety laws?
If this is true, why hasn't this reactor been shut dcwn when it threatens such a large population mass?
During the review by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission of the application for an operating license for Indian Point Unit 3, faulting was discovered in the plant site area. The NRC staff visited the site and inspected the fault exposures. Further investigations concluded that this faulting is geologically old ind poses no hazard to the plant. Because of the complexity of the geologic structure in the region of the Indian Point site, additional inves'.igations were undertaken, particularly of the 3.amapo fault that extends from northern New Jersey to northeast of Ladentown. At that point the fault branches into a wide :ene of less well defined f aults. The Mcit Farm Road fault trends toward Indian Point, but whether it crosses the Hudson River is not known.
The Atanic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board of the Nuclear Regulatory Ccmmission, after evidentiary nearings on various geologic and seismic issues related to Indian Point, made a finding on October 12,1977, that the Rampo fault is not a capable fault. NRC regulations define a " capable fault" as a fault which has e.xhibited one or more of the following characteri stics: (1) movecent at or near the ground surface at least once within the past 35,000 years or movement of a recurring nature within the past 500,000 years; (2) macroseismicity instrumentally determined with records of sufficient precision to demonstrate a direct relationship with the fault; (3) a structural relationship to a capable fault according to characteristics (1) or (2) such that movement on one could be reasonably expected to be accompanied by movement on the other. The Commission has not yet decided whether it will review the decision of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board on this and other seismic issues relating to Indian Point.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is censidering what special measures should be taken for nuclear power plants in areas of high Occulation density to reduce the probability of a severe reactor accident and to lessen the consequences of sucn an accident by reducing the amount of l
radioactive releases or delaying such releases in order to provide additional time for evacuation.
Interim measures have already oeen ordared for the nuclear power plants at the Indian Point and Zion sites, i
(
Attachments:
1.
NUREG.0673 2.
Interview with Dr. Upton Director, National Cancer Institute 3.
Message of 2/12/30 to Congress from The President i
_N_ _UR_EG-0673 ;
Answers to Questions About Removing Kn/pton from the
- Three Mile Island, Unit 2 Reactor Building i
TMI. Prograrn Offi_ce l
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 1
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commisalon p* nau i
i DUPLICATE DOCUMENT Entire document previously entered into system under:
ANO 3CO $ 3,--) a c:,(C3 No. of pages:
7
4 l
NUREG/CR-0130 Vol.1 TECHNOLOGY, SAFETY AND COSTS OF DECOMMISSIONING A REFERENCE PRESSURIZED WATER REACTOR POWER STATION i
R.1. Smith G. J. Konzek W. E. Kennedy, Jr.
c CERPT l
Manuscript Completed: May 1978 Date Published: June 1978 Batteile Pacific Northwest Laboratory Battelle Boulevard DUPLICATE DOCUMENT ment Entire document previously mission l
entered into system under:
7% M 56444 ANO No. of pages:
..-