ML19332E377

Answer to Director'S Decision Under 10CFR2.206.* Opposes 890925 Director'S Decision DD-89-07,denying Author 890903 Petition to Intervene & Stop Scheduled 891012 Launch of Galileo Spacecraft Due to Risk Placed on Public Health

ML19332E377
Person / Time
Site:	Turkey Point
Issue date:	10/07/1989
From:	Saporito T NUCLEAR ENERGY ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT
To:	NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
References
CON-#489-9304 2.206, DD-89-07, DD-89-7, NUDOCS 8912070147
Download: ML19332E377 (6)

Text

,- .

3 y#o'l

, e \

ie w NUCLEAR ENERGY ACCOUNTABILITY. PROJECT l

. . .y  ;

1202 Sioux Street a Jupiter, Florida 33458 + (407) 743 0770 l

Environmental Protection + Involvement = Litioation + Information l

'89 nCT 16 R2 26 j

1. lLIT  !

UNITED STATES OF' AMERICA Fi; N'JCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION U" -

p SECRETARY OF THE COMMISSION 00-89-07 eaaeaae******=sa -s In the matter of 10 CFR Section 2.206 1 U.S. Department of Energy  : DD-83-07 and a National Aeronautics and

• Space Administration *

• October 7, 1989 Galileo Project *

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • e ANSWER TO DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 CFR SECTION 2.206 1 On September 25,'1989, Mr. Robert M. Bernero, Director Office 1

of Nuclear Material Safety tnd Safeguards issued a Director's Sacision (DD-89-07) Under 10 CFR Section 2.206. The DD-89-07 states in part that:

"By a petition dated September 3, 1989, (Petition), Thomas J. Saporito, Jr., on behalf of the Nuclear Energy Accountability Project, of Jupiter, Florida, filed a request pursuant to 10 CFR Section 2.206 that the Nucisar Regulatory Commission (the NRC or l the Commir,sion) intervene and stop the scheduled October 12, 1989, i launch of the Galileo Spacecraft. The Petition alleges that the launch of the Galileo Spacecraft, which contains considerable quantities of plutonium-238, would be in violation of 42 U.S.C.

Section 5841, which the Petition states prohibits the NRC from )

licensing any shipments by air transport of plutonium in any form, whether exports, imports or domestic shipments, with the exception

.of certain medical devices, until the NRC certifies that a safe container has been developed and tested and shown to survive certain tests. The Petition alleges a number of health and safety concerns should the launch fail and should the plutonium be dispersed in the atmosphere."

0912070147 892007 PDR MISC 8912070J47 PDR 0 '3

i  :" ,- s I ,  ;

I INTRODUCTION  ;

In the DD-89-07 Mr. Bernero states "Mr. Saporito's Petition presents two principal arguments in support of the request. One is ,

that the launch of the Galileo Spacecraft carrying plutonium would be in violation of 42 U.S.C. Section 5841, more correctly Public ,

1 Law 94-79...The other is that if the launch of the Galileo Spacecraft carrying plutonium is allowed to proceed, the launch ,

would cause undue risk, placing the public health and safety in i grave danger."  !

As can be determined from the plain meaning of the statute,  !

it is to apply only to air transport, i.e., transport from one point on the earth's surface to another such point by a vehicle that moves through, and is supported by the lift provided by, air.

Indeed, the statue itself makes reference to the term " aircraft". ,

.The vehicle which is to launch the Galileo Spacecraft is a rocket, ,

not an aircraft. Nor does the Galileo mission involve an export. -

import, or domestic shipment of olutonium. Consequently, the o

provisions of Public Law S4-79 are not applicable to the Galileo launch and do not provide authority to stop the launch as alleged by the Petitioner."

l "Mr. Saporito's other argument is that the launch of the Galileo Spacecraft carrying plutonium will cause undue risk,  :

placing the public health and safety in grave danger. His Petition  !

cites 20-items ("a" through "t") as grounds for his position."

l "A comprehensive Federal safety evaluation process has been ,

l carried out with regard to the Galileo mission and the employment  ;

l of the plutonium-loaded devices for energy on the Galileo Spacecraft"..." launch approval has been obtained from the office of the Precident."

l DISCUSSION l

L NEAP has thorougly reviewed the 00-89-07 NRC response and proffers the following arguments opposing this decision as described herein:

(1) 42 U.S.C. 5841 or Public Law 94-79, in part " prohibits H

the NRC from licensing any shipments by air transport of plutonium i

l l

1

T*  ;

i +

t E.  :

t in any form, whether exports, imports or domestic shipments..."  !

As stated in D0-89-07, "As can be determined from the plain  !

meaning of the statute, it is to apply only to air transport. *

, 1.e., transport from one point on the earth's surface to another

, such. point by a vehicle that moves through, and is supported by {

the lift provided by, air. Indeed, the statue itself makes [

reference to the term " aircraft". The vehicle which is to launch j the Galileo Spacecraft is a rocket, not an aircraft, her does the i Galileo mission involve an export, import, or domestic shipment of plutonium." -

Mr. Bernero erred in his determination above wherein the f

Galileo mission will participate in the export of plutonium in to space. NEAP's_ alternative argument is that the Galileo mission is subjected to unanticipated equipment failure which would require  ;

the mission to abort.

During the abort phase of the mission, both solid rocket boosters along with the external fuel tank would be jettisoned +

away from the shuttle vehicle. The shuttle vehicle would then determine which of, several emergency alternate landing sites, on ,

the planet Earth's surface to glide to for an emergency landing.

Therefore, should the shuttle vehicle engage in an aborted mission, plutonium will have been transported from one point on the earth's surface to another such point and thus the Galileo l-

F ,

I i

I Galileo mission would involve an export, import, or domestic shipment of plutonium. Indeed, during this phase of the Galileo l

mission, the shuttle vehicle meets the criteria described in DD-89-07 to be considered an aircraft.."by a vehicle that moves ,

I

.through, and is supported by the lift provided by, air." !

Consequently, the provisions of Public Law 94-79 are applicable to the Galileo launch and do provide authority to stop the launch.

(2) The launch of the Galileo Spacecraft carrying plutonium will cause undue risk, placing the public health and safety in grave danger. NEAP's Petition cites 20 items ("a" through "t") as '

grounds for its position. t i

DD-89-07 states "The cormic form of the plutonium dioxide, its iridium encapsulation, and the form of graphite in the surrounding package were all selected to make the RTGs resistant to the potential hazards of missions like the G&lileo mission.

Sample RTGs and LWRHUs (with dummy fuel) have been subjected to an array of tests to demonstrate their resistance to fire, explosion and impact."

r NEAP has reviewed documents which evidence that during at I least one test of the RGT assemblies, a failure occurred in which

.the RTG was completely destroyed. NEAP believes that this failure evidences that- the launch of the Galileo mission would be a violation of Public Law 94-79 wherein stated in DD-89-07 that

"...and the restriction is to apply until the NRC certifies that a

1 l

)

1 safe container has been developed and tested...which will not rupture under crash and blast-testing equivalent to the crash of'a b

high-flying aircraft." '

Consequently, the failure of the above mentioned RTG unit evidences that a safe container has not yet been developed and [

tested which will not rupture under crash and blast-testing  :

[ equivalent to the crash of a high-flying aircraft and therefore the launch of the Galileo mission would be a violation of Public i Law 94-79. Indeed, DD-89-07 evidences that the RTGs are only +

" resistant to the potential hazards of missions like the Galileo mission."

NEAP believes that Mr. Bernero erred in his position stating in 0D-89-07 that "... launch approval has been obtained from the Office of the President." NEAP understands that the Office of the L President did not approve the launch, but merely passed.', through the ';;hi te House without formal objection and that no formal l

approval was granted by the Honorable George Bush.

CONCLUSION NEAP'S Petition provides a basis for the NRC to intervene in NASA's planned launch of the Galileo Spacecraft. The cited statute ,

does apply to the planned launch and provides a basis for the requested action in the Petition. Furthermore, the Feoeral safety evaluation process carried out with regard to the employment of plutonium-loaded devices for energy on the Galileo mission fails

l s

1 to appropriately provide for due consideration of the risks 1

\

involved. NEAP believes that the-Federal safety evaluation process n

[ germane to the Galileo mission failea to adequately evaluate and  !

L provide for an effective emergency- evacuation plan and

'i decontamination plan should the Galileo mission fail. 1 NEAP believes that the Fedtral safety evaluation process  ;

germane to the Galileo mission should have also required the

= evacuation of a radius of area embraced within the danger :one prior to the launch of the Galileo mission.

Finally, the Federal safety evaluation process germane to the Galileo mission appears to have not properly determined the risk factor of a shuttle launch considering that no such mission containing a plutonium payload has ever before been accomplished.

Also, sufficient reliability of the solid rocket boosters has not L been established due to the short amount of time since the 1

i Challenger accident and due to the limited amount of space 1

missions since the redesign of the solid rocket boosters.

For all- the above reasons, and in the interest of public health and safety and in the interest of the environment as a whole, NEAP requests the consideration of the Commission to implement the requests embraced within the Petition.

cc: Honorable George Bush Respectfully submitted.

E Honorable John Breaux Honorable Dante Fasce11 _ _ _ , _m Stewart Ebneter, Adm. NRC RII " ' "

v/ r " '

Oscar DeMiranda NRC SAC Thomas J. Saporito, Jr.

Executive Director, NEAP 4

i