ML19351G499
| ML19351G499 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 02/04/1981 |
| From: | NRC - ADVISORY PANEL FOR DECONTAMINATION OF TMI UNIT 2 |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8102240039 | |
| Download: ML19351G499 (96) | |
Text
?
NCCI. EAR REGCI.ATORY CCMMISSICN Je N
f e
Ih the Mattar of:
IEETING OF THE ADVISORY PANEL FOR THE DECONTAliINATION OF THREE liILE ISLAND 2 DATE:
February 4, 1981 PAGES:
1-93 AT:
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania ALD W %T M '0 f.Q 400 vi.Tda Ave., 5.W. W=* * "g--a, D. C. 20024 Telephone: (202) 544-2345 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS POOR QUAUTY PAGES j
8 ' 0 %W--_--
=
t NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMNISSION 2
MEETING OF ADVISORY PANEL FOR THE DECONTAMINATION 3
0F THREE HILE ISLAND 2 4
5 WEDNESDAY, FERRUARY 3,
1981 6
7 The Forum of the Ed uca tion 8
Building 9
Commonwealth C Walnut Streets to Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 11 12 The meeting of the Advisory Panel for the 13 Decontamination of Three Mile Island Unit 2 convened, 14 pursuant to notice at 7:14pm.
15 16 PANEL MEMBESS PRESENT:
17 18 JOHN MINNICH, Chairman 19 JOEL ROTH o
20 THOMAS B. COCHRAN 21 NUNZIO PALLADINO 22 HENRY WAGNER 23 ROBERT REID 24 ARTHUR NORRIS 25 ANNE ~nUNK ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGMA AVE. S.W. WASHINGTCN. 0.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
1 DELEGATES PEPPISENTING PANEL MEMBEBS PRESENT:
2 3
GE0BGE TOKUHATA 4
CRAIG WILLIANSON i
5 IHOMAS GERUSKY 6
7 NFC LIASOV ??FSENTt 8
9 WILLI AM TR AVERS 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 23 24 25 ALDERSCN REPORTING COMPANY. NC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W WASH!NGTON. D.C. 20C24 (252) 554-2345
2 9
2E9GZEDIESS 2
MB, HINNICH:
This is tonight a working session 3
where we hope that somehow, good Lord willing, we can come 4
up with some sort of working document that will be the basis 5
for our first presentation to the NBC, as has been 6
stipulated in our charge in fornulating the panel.
7 I welcome the members whc are here.
We have a 8
problem, which I will get into in a moment.
If you will 9
just remember when you use your mike, press the button, and to when you're finished press it back off so we don't get any 11 feedback.
12 We have a quorum tonight of seven people.
We have 13 a problem related to the quorum, and perhaps the future.
I 14 have received a copy of the letter to John Ahearne from the SS Governor, in which he is requesting that Secretaries Jones 16 and Muller and General Smith he withdrawn from the panel and 17 that in their place the three gentlemen facing me -- Dr.
18 Tokuhata, Tom Gerusky, and Craig Williamson--- would replace 19 those three gen tlemen, but as observers only wi thou t th e 20 ability to actually take any official position.
21 This presents a problem in that that would reduce 22 as to a nine-member panel, and I suppose what I will have to do ir correspond with Er. Ahearne concerning this matter.
I 23 24 just don't know what will come of this.
It could present 25 the problem of getting a quorum at the other two meetings i
i ALCER$oN REPORT 1NG COMPANY LNC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE. S.W WASHINGTON,3 C. 20024 (202) 554 2345 1
3 s
1 that we have listed.
I as not sure what your schedules I tried to schedule them well enough in advance that 2
are.
3 we would hopefully have our calendars free.
But unless we 4
change our -- I have to go back into my minutes -- unless we 5
change our requirements, it could present a quorum problem 6
and therefore a problem of any further action by the Board.
7 And I would stay on that subject for a moment and 8
take any input from panel members that care to give se tha t 9
input f o r th e re co rd.
10 The young lady has the attendance, and as I noted, 11 there are seven official voting menbers here, which does 12 make a quorum.
13 Go ahead.
14 ER. ROTHz Jack, I would appreciate if you or 15 maybe Tom or someone could read the le tter, you know, from 16 the Governor on that, so that would be in the record and we 17 all would understand his reasons.
l 11 8 ER. MINNICH.
Okay.
As I said, it is addressed to 19 Mr. Ahearne.
"Some months ago you asked me to appoint three f
20 officials to represent the Consonwealth as indiciduals on the advisory panel for the decontamination of Three Mile 21 22 Island Unit 2.
Subsequently, I named Clifford Jones, l
23 secretary of the Department of DER, Dr. H. Arnold Muller, secretary of health, and Lieutenant Dewitt Smith, director 24 f
25 of FEM A.
i 1
ALOERSoN REPCRTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGiMA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 33024 (2C2) 554 2345
4 "As we have already communicated informally to the 1
2 NRC, events in subsequent months lead us to question both 3
the wisdom and utility of having three such senior officials 4
as participating members of the panel which, meeting 5
exclusively in open sessions, is discussing and preparing to take positions on matters of great sensitivity and direct 6
7 import to both the people and the Government of the 8
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
"The potentia 1 fo r policy conf usion or conflict 9
must reserve 10 appears to be substantial, and I,of course, ultimate Commonwealth policy decisions in this area to my 11 12 own office.
At the same time, I remain persuaded that both the substance and procesdings of the panel's work are 13 14 important to us."
15 And accordingly, he would like to withdraw the 18 names of the Secretaries and substitute the people I 17 mentioned "to serve as my observers at meetings of the 18 advisory panel.
All three of these gentlemen are highly in their own areas and occupy positions of both 19 expert 20 importance and relevance.
While they will not.be able to 21 take positions with respect to new policy issues, I am 22 certain they will serve your purposes and ours very well.
23
" Sincerely, Dick Thornburgh."
I might say that I can understand and appreciate 24 25 the Governor's dilemma.
He 's the leader, and I don't think ALDER $oN REPORTING CCMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGlHIA AVE., S.V" WASHINGTCN, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
5 1
he would probably appreciate someone taking a position that 2
might be contrary to his as part of his family.
And so I 3
can understand that.
4 ER. PALLADINO:
Mr. Chairman, I find an 5
interesting dilemma as a result of this letter.
The 6
committee is no longer constituted along the lines that the 7
NRC indicated it wanted it constituted.
And tha t vss to 8
include appropriate representatives of the State 9
Government.
So the balance of the committee and the input 10 that could be provided, as well as the decisions that are to 11 be made, no longer represent the State in its -- in the 12 deliberations.
13 And I find this a.very uncomfortable position.
I 14 think we ought to get a clarification as to whether or not 15 this is acceptable to Chairman Ahearne or whether the 16 committee should be-reconstituted.
17 MR. MINNICH:
Thank you, Doctor, I appreciate 18 that.
And I think that is really what I had in mind when I 19 said I should correspond with Mr. Ahearne.
There is the 20 other corresponding probles, in that the makeup was directed 21 by a Resolution of Congress.
And I don't know what this 22 does to that.
And so I have to get a res'ponse, I am sure.
23 HR. PALLADINO If I say, while the Congress had 24 indicated a Resolution, I think this action was taken by NRC 25 without such a Resolution.
/
ALDERSoM REPORTING CCMPANY. INC.
400 vlRGnNtA AVE, S.W. WASHtNGToN. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2346
6 1
- 53. KINNICH:
Yes, you are right.
You are exactly 2
right.
3 Anyone else?
4 (No response.)
5 M3. MINNICH.
If not, we will go on to the next 6
matter before us.
7 By the wa y, I do wish to express my thanks for the a
getting our isst meeting minutes very promptly.
And th a t 's 9
a hin t, young lady.
I hope that you can re as prompt as the 10 last one was, which gives us time to digest.
11 This young ladr is Diane Hammond, who is taking I have not met her friend to 12 the transcript, along with 13 her right.
But welcome to both of you.
14 She has expressed interest tha t we finish by 7430 15 so they can motor back to Washington, D.C.
16 (Laughter.)
17
- 53. !INNICH:
I told her, " Don't expect an early 18 s ee ti ng. "
19 Okay, just a couple of other things I want to 20 ascertain from the panelists.
I have received some material 21 which I assume has also been transcripted to you.
One is 22 from the NEC, which is the enclosure to a letter da ted 23 December 22nd from Bernard J. Snyder.
Have you all received 24 that?
25 The other is from Het Id concerning the curies ALDER $cN EEPCRTING 00up MY. :NC.
400 VIRGINtA Avt SJ#, WASHINGTON. D.C. 3M24 (2C'4 $64-2345
7 1
dis ch arged.
That was discussed at one of our meetings.
2 Have you all received that?
3 VOICE:
No.
4
- 53. HINNICH:
This was in response to a discussion 5
we had on December 30th.
That being the case, I will see 6
that you all get a copy.
7
- 52. COCHRAN:
Excuse me.
Would you furnish the 8
Sernie Snyder correspondence again?
9 MR. MINNICH:
This was apparently an enclosure 10 that was omitted f rom a 2etter dated December 22nd from 11 Bernie Snyder.
12 MR PALLADINO:
Why don't you send both of them 13 just in case?
14 MB. MINNICH:
Okay.
And finally, from Lake 15 Barrett in response to questions before the advisory on it, 18 this does indicate tha t he did copy all members.
This is 17 also as a result of the December 30th meeting.
So you all 18 have that.
19 For the record, Diane, please indicate that we l
20 have with us from Metrpolitan Edison Mr. Robert Arnold and 21 Er. Gale Hover.
In case the panel does need to ask any l
22 questions of those gentlemen, they are here and willing to 23 respond.
24 Now, then, Tom called me one day and asked if I 25 would care if he prepared a draft to submit to all the panel ALOERSCN REPCRTING COMPANY. INC.
400 V.RGINtA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTCN. D.C. 20C24 (2C2) 554 2345
8 1
members -- I left mine get away.
Ch, may I, please.
2 Oh, and also for the record, M rs. Ann Trunk, a 3
panelist member is also present.
Good evening.
4 MRS. THUNK:
I as sorry I am late.
5 MR. MINN ICH:
That is quite all right.
6 3RS. TRUNKS Jean said she couldn 't get here 7
today.
8 MR. MINNICH:
Okay.
9 MRS. TRUNK One of her children was sick.
10 MH. MINNICH:
Oh.
Okay.
Thank you.
So Jean Core sends her regrets.
It 12 Anyhow, Tom asked if it would be permissible for 13 him to prepare a paper to circulate among the seabers that 14 would give you an opportunity to review and perhaps gather 15 your thoughts, and we could at least have a starting poin t 16 f rom which to begin tonight, because, quite frankly, we 17 would be hard-pressed, I believe, if Tom hadn't done this.
18 By the way, Bill, were your people able to put 19 anything together for us?
HR. TRAVEBSs Yes.
In fact, it was sent 20 21 HR. MINNICH:
Oh.
Is that -- okay, is that this?
MR. TRAVERS:
No, it was something that I sent to 22 all of the panel members that provided the table and licting Z3 24 of issues that were brought up at other meetings.
3R. 30THz What date is that?
25 ALDER $oN REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W. WASMNGioN D.C. 20024 (2C2) 554-2345
9 1
MR. MINNICH :
Do you have copies of that?
I have 2
not received tha t.
3 ER. PALLADINO:
I didn't receive it either.
4 HB. HINNICHs Do you have extra copies with you, 5
Bill?
6
- 53. TRAVERS I have just got one.
I will be 7
happy to give it to you and let you read from it.
8 5H. MINNICHs Okay.
9 HR. PALLADINCs Could I have a copy of it?
I to didn't receive a copy.
11 HR. HINNICH:
May I have this, Bill?
And I will 12 see that they all get copies.
13 NH. TRAVERSt I will make sure they do as well.
14.
NH. MINNICH:
Oh, okay.
15 MR. TRAVERSs This is the mailing list, and I'll 16 go around and make sure everyone's address is correct.
17 HR. HINNICHs You know, I usually receive i
18 eve rything, Bill, but this I do not recall crossing my 19 desk.
The issue I was referring to, though, was I had 20 asked if someone could go through the minutes and tra nscrip t 21 22 when it was finished, and this-is what that is in response 23 to.
Okay.
Fine.
24 Go ahead.
MR. COCHBANs There is a good bit of data which 25 ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY ;NC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W. W ASHINGTCN, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
.~
10 1
comes forth which was going to be provided by DOE.
Rave you 2
heard anything f rom DOE 7 3
MR. HINNICHa You're referring to the -- is it Tom i
4 Kirk, Bill Kirk?
And the cosaittee that vac formulated i
l 5
through the University of Georgia or someplace like that?
8 MR. CCCHRANs No.
I asked Woodie Cunninohan a f
7 number cf questions when he was present a t the previous 8
meeting, and he said that he would provide the committee 9
with answers.
10 MB. NINNICH:
To my knowledge, I have not received i
11 anything from -- I thought you were referring to a request I
i 12 at last sonth's meeting in which --
13 ER. GEBUSKT:
That's EPA.
l 14 MB. MINNICH s EPA.
Yes.
Well, I contacted Nr.
15 Kirk, and the report he gave me was they have not yet I
16 finalired their evaluation.
A statement has been prepared.
17 It is in EPA,has been held up.
They do have some major 18 areas of concern.
And when that is ready, they'will be glad to furnish us with copies of whatever it is they come out 19 20 with.
That had to do with their analysis of the 27 environmental impact statement.
I know I had followed 22 through on that.
l 23 Now, then, I referred to the document that Toa 1
l 24 prepared.
Tom dealt with two issues, I believe, 25 specifically, the water and the low-level waste.
ALDER $CN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W. WASHINGTCN. 0.C. 20024 (202) 564-2346
11 1
I might say one thing, Tom, that our initial 2
charge, of course, has been to respond to the water first.
3 And I would suggest that we stick to that issue and save the 4
other issue until they 're ready to hear our response to 5
that, that we respond to the water issues first.
And I 6
would suggest that we spend our time tonight on the water 7
issue in order to, hopefully, tyy and come up wi th a 8
consensus among us.
9 MR. COCHBAN I have no problem with that.
There 10 were -- just to correct the record -- four other issues that 11 I addressed.
12
- 58. MINNICRs Yes.
13 NH. COCHRANs But I think that is a reasonable 14 approach, just to focus on the water.
I as sure we won't 15 get through with the water issue tonight, in any case.
16 NR. MINNICH:
That is a lot of water to drink.
17 (Laughter.)
18 NH. MINNICH:
All right, have you all had a chance 19 to review Tom's paper?
And can we begin discussion of his
-- well, let's see --
20 21
- 59. COCHBAN:
I have a suggestion.
22 MR. MINNICH:
Yes, go ahead.
l 23 HE. COCHRANs In order to -- I sometimes find it usef ul to f ocus on the recommendations first and see if we 24 25 can get some agreement on the recommendations and then go i
l l
l ALCERSCN REPORT:NG COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRG4NIA AVE. S.W. WASHINGfoN, D.C. 20024 (202) 564 2345 I
.w
-,y
12 back and try to fill in the narrative or, in this case, the 1
2 findings.
3 ER. HINNICHs You 're referring to the 4
recommendations in the --
b 5
MR. COCHRAN:
No.
I am referring to my 6
recommendations or aryone else's.
And I certainly don't 7
vant to suggest that sine are the only ones 8
- 58. MINNICH:
No.
Fine.
9 NR. COCHRANs
-- that should be on the table.
But 10 I just think we ought to focus on the recommendations first rather than beginning with -- if we're sticking with our 11 rather than beginning with the findings.
92 draft 13 ER. MINNICHs Okay.
All right.
Tour recommendations are on page -- as soon as I find it here --
14 95 MR. COCHBANs Le t 's try 14.
96 ER. MINNICH:
14.
Right.
Do you all have that 17 copy?
Okay.
18 (Pauce.)
19 MR. MINNICHs Tom, you wouldn' t happen to knov off hand what the levels were that were actually being 20 21 routinely released to the river prior to the accident by 22 TMI-27 23 MR. COCHRANs I don't have those spe,ific data.
c 7
24 Perhaps 3et Ed could provide those.
25 NR. MINNICH:
Bob Arnold?
ALCER$oN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGANIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20024 (202) 564-2346
93 1
- 53. CCCH3ANs First of all, I as not sure that Bob 2
has seen this or knows what the recessendations are.
3
- 53. HOVEYs Excuse se.
Hr. Arnold, I think, is on 4
the phone.
Excuse se, as I bla sting you out there?
5
- 53. EINNICH:
No, no, tha t 's all righ t.
6
- 53. HOVEY:
We don't have that information with 7
us, the latest.
It's available, but just not with us.
We 8
could provide it, but we don't have it with us at this 9
time.
10
- 53. 3INNICHs All right.
Fine.
Thank you, Gale.
11
- 13. HOTEY:
We have the inforsation which you have 12 also in tha t letter that I sent you, Mr. Minnich, on 13 releases up to 1978, through 1978.
14
- 53. COCH3ANs let ze just sa y what th e 15 recozzendations, the second recozzendation is, which say be is obvious in any case.
There are two points.
The first is it 17 doesn' t =ake sense, in terms of the health impacts, to sake 18 a distinction be tween accident water on the one hand and 19 vater that becomes contaminated through decontanination activities on the other and allow the release of one and not 20 21 the release of the other or vice versa.
22 And to provide flexibility to Met Ed to release 23 very low-level water in the course of the decontamination 2a activities, this reconsendation allows them to do that but 25 sets a limit that it shouldn't exceed what they were AL EASGee &
fWG CoWANY ;NC.
400 vtmGweA Avt S.w. WAspeeGTCN DA 20024 m 564-2346
14 1
releasing routinely while the reactor was operating.
2 And the sense of it is that those releases are 3
certainly well within the standards, allowable standards.
4 At least that would be my understanding.
And that the local 5
citirens should have no more difficulty with those releases Q
than they would with the releases while the plant was 7
operating.
8 It seems to me a sort of sensible place to draw 9
the line and still allow some flexibility to release very to low Contamination, very low-level contamined water.
11
- 53. MINNICHs Tom, on the first point you made, I 12 believe that was really wha t Ne t Ed was the point they were 13 trying to make at the :ecember 30 meetings that the two should not be really treated differently, in essence; isn't 14 15 it?
16 MH. COCHHAN Well,.that's not my understanding.
97 My understanding is that they wanted to make clear that 18 there were different types of water in terms of the legal 19 requirements imposed on Het Ed in the settlement of the suit 20 between Het Ed and the NRC 21
- 53. MINNICHs That's right.
and the City of la nca ster.
22
- 33. COCH3ANs 23
- 53. WAGNE3s Mr. Chairman.
24
- 53. HINNICH:
Yes.
25 H3. WAGNE3s I would like to support Tom's A1.CERSoN REPCRT.NG CowANY. WC, 400 VlaGMA AVE, S.W, wA9eNGToN D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2346
l 15 1
recommendation.
I came to exactly the same conclasion, and 2
I would like to see if we could all agree on that >cint, 3
that they could release an amount up to the amount that is permitted under their license under routine operation.
4 5
MR. MORRISt May I?
6
- 13. MINNICH:
Certainly.
7 MR. MORRIS:
I don't understand what is meant by 8
"an amount not to exceed actual levels routinely released 9
annually while IMI-2 operates."
I mean thet's just a 10 statement that may include all the water without having any 11 other information.
And I couldn't subscribe to that with 12 just that general statement.
13 ER. COCHRANs let me play a little game with you.
14 Was the City of lancaster disturbed by routine releases from 15 tha t power plant while it was operating, releases that 16 presumably were within the fedaral, state, and local limits 17 imposed on the Licensee?
18 3R. HORRIS Are you looking for a "Yes" or "No" 19 answer, or may I add an additional comment?
NH. COCHRAN:
Any "Yes" or "No" answer would be 20 21 helpful.
22 (laughter.)
23-HR. HORRISs Well, you're going zo have a 24 difficult time getting that kind of answer.
25 (Laughter.)
ALCER$oN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGIN!A AVE, S.W., WASH 6MGToN D.C. 20024 (202) $54-2345
i 16 1
MB. MORRISs I mean I think it is a very difficult i
1 th.'nq for anybody to say that how the city and the citizens only of lancaster but o ! the whole central Pennsylvania 3
not j
4 area felt prior to the release, I think there is a 5
com pletely different f eeling no w.
And that is part of my 6
concern, Tom.
You know, we've been told that the normal 7
releases that would have taken place in the whole year, that 8
there is less radioactivity in the water compared to maybe 9
100 days out of the whole year, and it's heen shut down for 10 going on two years now.
But there is still a lot of So I don't know if you can compare it the way you 11 concern.
12 apparently want to.
13 And,you know, I would like you to explain to se what kind of volumes of water are you referring to that 14 15 could be routinely released without exceeding the limits 10 that you 're referring to?
What kind of volumes?
17 ER. COCHRAN.
You could release the entire distilled water inventory of the world under that criteria, 18 19 because it would have no radioactivity in it.
The water is 20 not the issue.
The activity in the water is what causes 27 health impacts.
And what this recommendation attempts to do 22 is establish, in effect, an allowable limit on the activity 23 that might be released routinely from that plant.
And that 24 isz Don't release any more now than you were releasing 25 while you were operating.
ALDER $CN REPORTING COMPANY,!NC, 400 VIRG4NIA AVE S.W. W ASMNGTCN, D.C. 20024 (202) 564-2345
97 1
MR. MORRIS:
Well, what you're saying then, I 2
think, is -- and I think this is a -- this is a key point, 3
because I think what you are saying is you're saying, 4
" Forget any kind of concern or the emotional part of the 5
question, throw that aside and consider only what you would 6
consider to be a health effect as it relates to 7
radioactivitT."
8 Is that what you're saying?
Because I think that 9
is the major thing tha t has to be discussed first.
That is 10 what you seem to be saying, Tom.
11 MR. MINNICH4 Excuse me.
let me interject, 12 Mayor.
There is a discharge routinely ongoing right now, I 13 believe,from THI-1.
Now, it's not active, but there ir e 14 routine discharge occurring th e re.
15 MR. COCHRANs From THI-1 and THI-2.
1e You, and I presume the citizens, are right now, 17 under the settlement, permitting Met Ed to release 18 radioactivity that has been released-into the conta.'.nment 19 system of THI-2 into the Susquehann1 River as long as it f
doesn 't have this definition of accident-generated water, as 20 21 long as it is water that has b'en subsequently used to wash down the walls or to wash equipment or in the laboratory or 22 to wash the -- do laundry operations and so forth.
23 You are willing to permit the release of those 24 25 radioactive materials.
I as saying it shouldn't make a ALDER $oN REPORTING COMPANY.INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W WASMNGToN. 0.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
\\
18
)
t whole lot of difference how you label the water, as long as 2
it is the same amount of radioactivity that is being 3
released.
And we are trying to provide some flexibility for i
4 them to flush their toilets out there and dus, out the very 5
liv-level wastes from the laboratory operations, but not be 6
concerned about really where that atos of activity came 7
from, whether it is fros " accident-generated water" or water 8
from come other source.
the City of 9
ER. McHRIS r Well, we spent 10 Lancaster spent -- almost $100,000 to differentiate between 11 those two particular items that you are referring to stying 12 that we shouldn't be concerned about.
When you refer to the 13 fact that there is some radioactive water as a result of 14 TNI-2 being discharged out, there hava been reports that 95 have been given out by the NRC for months and months and 16 zonths, and suddenly ther changed their reporting in 17 December, and it was the first time that they mentioned any 18 possibility of release from T5I-2.
And that is because there was water from the control and service building and 19 20 the turbine building that -- the buildings had been 21 decontaminated but apparently there was a very small trace 22 of radioactivity that was still getting into a sump, and 23 even tho ugh the water cannot even be measured --- the 24 radioactivity in the water can't be seasured when it's 25 discharged into the river -- they felt that they should ALDER $oN REPORTING CoWPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE.,3.W, WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2346
,w
=-w p-
+
y-.
u 3
19 1
start reporting it as of December and January in the latest 2
reports.
3 So when you mention that, you are talking anout a 4
very, very small amount that, in the past, wasn't mentioned 5
because it was so small.
And so it was the first time tha t 6
I knew that anything from THI-2 was being released was very 7
recently, as recent as last week, Tom.
8
- 23. WAGNER:
Mr. Chairman.
9 ER. MINNICH:
Yes, go ahead.
to MR. WAGNEas I think it depends on whether you're 11 looking at the total amount of radioactivity that is 12 released, or the concentrations.
If you consider the total 13 amount of radioactivity that is released, it would take then 14 ten years to release the water if they didn't exceed the 15 amount release with respect to tritium.
16 So the thing that I would like to advocate is that the l
17 with respect to the water, we take the viewpoint 18 whole package of what Tom has said here, when he says 19
" levels," it's really not clear whether you mean 20 concentra*Aon levels or whether you mean quantities.
If you 21 sean quantities, the tritica would be about ten times the 22 amount that would be released from the reactor under normal 23 operating conditions.
Now, I personally would like to go on record as 24 25 saying that I think release of that tritium would be I
l ALDEpsoN REPORTING CoWPANY,INC.
>00 VIRGMA AVE. S.W. WASweGTCN. DA 20024 (202) 554 2b45
20 1
perfectly safe.
But I do think, for the reasons that we 2
men,tioned including the socioeconomic factors, that the 3
water should not be released at this time, but the d,econtamination process should be carried out as 4
5 expeditiously as possible and the water be stored in those 6
tanks until, as Tom says in his recommendation, precise 7
seasurements can be made as to the radioactivity level after 8
tha t wa ter has been used for other things.
9 So I would think that the reconmendation at the to present time, I in essence agree with the things that are 11 said there, but I interpret what he is saying about release 12 of the radioactivity to mean the total quantity of tritica, which would mean that it would take several years to release 13 14 the water.
15 3R. COCHRAN:
Yes, except I would make one further 16 sodification to that.
And that is ther, Met Ed, has 17 probably released more of some activity, for example -- I am 18 just picking an isotope out of the air, I am not sure if but, for example, more strontium-90 than 19 this is correct tritius while it was -- in terms of some harard index --
20 21 while they were operating.
22 And rather than say, "Niv you can release anly as 23 auch tritius as you released tritius," I would like to have 24 some flexibility built in there to say you can release only 25 the same sort of drinking-water harard now as you released-ALDERSON T4EPCRTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE. S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
21 1
when you were operating normally.
2 That would allow them to make trade-offs between 3
tritium and strontium and so for^h in terms of a hazards 4
index, which is sort of an easy way to do and an appropriate S
way to do that.
8 MR. WAGNERs It seems to me that the problem is 7
that I believe -- and I think sost of the reports that I 8
have read -- most people believe there is no hazard in 9
releasing the water with proper dilution -- none whatsoever to from the standpoint of public health -- but there is a 11 hazard for psychological, social, and economic ef fects.
12 So that if you say that you can release it within 11 the limits of some hazard, they could release it in one fell 14 swoop, which we don't think would be a good idea.
15 So I think that you really have to say we have to te have some kind of a time criterion.
And as I said at the 17 last meeting, I would be opposed to releasing the water at 18 the present time.
And I wo uld, therefore, propose -- if you 19 interpret Tom's document with respect to the total quantity,
~
20 and if you interpret that level to mean total quantity, it 21 couldn 't be released all at once, but it could be released 22 over time, maybe taking as such as ten years.
23 But I don't think we need to make that decision 24 right now.
I think the decision should be made to 25 decontaminate the water as rapidly as possible and do all ALDERSoN REPcRTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
22 1
that we can to expedite the decontamination process, with 2
storage of the water, and delaying the decision as to what 3
is going to be done with it it unt!'. tt has been used, follodng his other recommendations for the decontamination 4
5 process, and then get exact readings as to hes much 8
radioactivity is in that water at the time that the decision 7
is made with respect to what to do about it.
l 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 18 17 18 19
(
20 21 l
(
22 i
(
D i
i 24 25 ALOERSoN REPCRT:NG COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASMNOTON. O.C. 20024 (202) 554-2346
-. ~. -.
1 N
tape 2 NRC 2/4 l
MR. PALLADINO: Mr. Chairman, could I ask a question?
sh 1 i
I'm not sure I understand the relationship between recommendation 1
2 2 and recommendation 4.
Recommendation 2 says "while decontamina-3 tion activities proceed", and it establishes what we ought to Y-4 do in terms of while the decontamination activities proceed.
It e
5, E
N says that Met-Ed-GPU'. >shoulde :rbe
.:. permitted to routinely 3
6l e
release to the Susquehanna River water contaminated with 3
7 I
radioactivity from TMI unit 2 in amounts not to exceed actual 8
dd 9l levels:: routinely released annually while TMI-2 operated.
5 10 {
Item 4 talks about following processing. Now there's E
some water that's not covered by either of those two. The 5
11 d
12 '
water that I guess would exceed the limits that are allowed under 5
\\
13 number 2, is that intended to be covered under number 4?
E E
14 DR. COCHRAN: Yes, all that water has to be processed.
d 15,
The water that's processed is -essentially the 1,500,000 gallo4s s
16 or so. 1,500,000 to 600,000 gallons will be processed.
While 5
m g-17 !
that processing.is taking place, the only thing I proposed was E
to allow Met-Ed. seme : flexibility -to: release levels of activity E
18 C
19 !
that would approximate what they were releasing when the plant e
i M
i 20 was operating and when people had no concern about releasing 21 those levels of activity.
22 MR. PALLADINO: Tom, could you also explain why you feel 23 it's necessary to store this other water on the site until you 24 get more -- why do you think you need to store it?
It's my 25 understanding based on information that we've received that it ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
I 24 could be safely discharged into the river.
DR. COCHRAS. The intent that I had there was rather 3
than this ccmmittee to get bogged down into a debate over 3
whather the decontamination prccess, such as the submerged
)
3 demineralizing system, were actually going to cperate as they've
)i been proposed by Met-Ed or NRC, that instead we simply say p
you claim that you can do this good a job; we think that that's j
possible; we'll set limits that you have to meet;. And in order l
7i to insure that you meet them, we want you to collect all that 9
water and store it until.:youthave essentially ecmpleted the g
operation, and then we can gocout and measure the activity and g
got an accurate reading on the quantity of water involved and g
tha quantity of radioactivity involved, and assure ourselves that c.
you in fact have done what you said you were going to do, I
g rather than sort of biasing by an open-ended contract that would g'
alicw them to sort of dribble this stuff cut ad infinitum.
p So it's simply a way of assuring ourselves that in 8
fact the decentamination activities will be done in accordance 9 l with the claims made at the beginning of the decontamination, y) rather than getting into a debate over whether in fact the tj j
systems are going to behave as the claims are made.
MR. PALLADINO: What I don't understand is what you will t2 know later that you don't kn'cw at any moment in time along the g3 L4 way.
15 DR. CCCHRAN: I'm told righ2 now that there's only l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
(
m 3
25 1
g ing to be about 1,600,000 gallons of water involved, and'if i
2l we can recycle this and so forth and minimize the total inven-3 tory of water, well, fine.
The proof is in the pudding. When you get through with your operations, if you've stored all the 4
water I can go out there with a stick and found out if in fact 5
a 3
1 8
6l; n
there's only 1,600,000 gallons.
4
=
E 7!
Similarly, you say you can decontaminate the water t
l 5
3!
down to a few tenths of a curie of various isotopes, n
d t
9; strontium-90, 89, cesium 137 and so forth.
Fine. I won't get i
10 into a debate over whether this submerged demineralizer system E!
11 '
is going to work, whether or not you'll have to polish the
<s materials with the Epicore 2 system and so forth.
You say you d
12 3=
s 13 can do it. I think you can probably do it. Let's set a standard..
-=
E 14 l When you've met the standard then we will be prepared to release d
15 the activity, or at least discuss how the activity should be --
x
=
MR. PALLADINO: But you're saying basically what I'm 16 3
2 saying. Why can't you establish a standard and when the water j7 b
18 that you have meets those standards, why not let it go where it t
ought to go?
19 lI 2
.4 l
20 -
MR. WAGNER: Can I try to answer chat?
There are many people, many citizens, who are worried about releasing the 21
\\
22li water despite the fact -- they may not recognize, they may not i
be able to accept the concept -that there are safe levels of 23 radioactivity. They believe that any radioactivity released into 24 i
25 the Susquehanna River is wrong. I think part of our educational ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
.m s h '4 26 process is to educate people that they've got to live with 1
radiation, and that they have radiation within their bcdies when 2
they're born and they have radiation within their bodies when 3
they die. To be alive you have to be associated with radiation.
4 The people have not been informed adequately about 5
the proper way of living with natural radiation or the radiation 6
l 7l associated with human activities such as medical radiation and I
8 the generation of power.
I e
So for reasons that we've discussed in detail, J
9i many, many groups of citizens are very much opposed.
For 10 exa=ple,:the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, which is one very active jg group with respect to the Chesapeake Bay region, they are very 32 13 much opposed to release.
So although I and I think most people who have looked
, 14 i
15 j into it in detail believe that releasing the radioactivity after decentamination is perfectly safe, but not wise.
And I would 1
16 cay whdare the particular advantages in releasing'it right now?
j7 There has to be scme water used in the decontamination process.
! 18 t
i l 19 l And if you're going to clean something up, you ordirkarily'take a.
r 20 l bucket of water over and use it until you've gotten the water 21 used up.
Well, there are two tanks thcu will hold 500,000 I
l 22 gallons each, and why not use that water for the decontamination t
i i
23; process, not releasing any into the river, and then as Tom i 24 :
says, measure how much radioactivity is in it when we're finished, I
25 and then at that time begin discussing it fully and keeping 1
I l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
I
2 27 I i
l 1;
citizens aware just what the situation is, then make a ' decision 2j as to what the ultimate disposal should be.
MR. MINNICK: Further, doctor, Met-Ed specifically 3
4 requested that we do exactly that, that we separate the two e
5 issues.
The problem of storage is not a major problem with R
i them. There is the clean-up as Henry stated. And I don't think N
d 6i e
we could get a consensus, a strong consensus from this panel at E
7 E
8 this moment to do just that, release the water.
n
\\
d i
I think the major concern should be to get that clean-up
- i 9
i I
h 10 l going and get it going.quickly.
z DR. COCHRAN: You know, the mayor of Lancaster won't l
11 is
- 5 12 i even let them flush the toilets.
Z i
O i
d 13 1 MR. MORRIS: I never said that. I have to '~now where that E
E 14 :
water is going to after they flush.
I think the point is, Tom, that I don't understand why you're suggesting giving Met-Ed 15 ;
- =
more flexibility or whatever the words were you used, when 16 :
is i
a6 1
6 17 they already stated and I think it's a matter of the record, E
i 5
18 l as the chairman has outlined, that they can store the water on l
19 the site.
t 8
1 n
20 MS. TRUNK: We're talking about flushing.and all that, i
21 but the people in Middletown don't want that water stored on i
22 j site either, so we've got a problem there. They would like to 23 get rid of it. I mean we've got the plant there. Why add more to 24 it by keeping the water there?.
25 MR. MORRIS: And what would you suggest ybeing done with ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
?I 28 the water? Are you suggesting that it be discharged into the i
river? Is that what you're advocating?
2l l
MS. TRUNK: I came here to learn, and I won't state my 3
views. Right now I just can't be sure. But we have to reali::e 4
.' S also that we can't store everything on that site because the 1
i pcople in the area, Goldsboro, Middletown, it's closer to us and 6
- 7 l we feel the hazard.
MR. M E R: Mr. Chairman, I agree absolutely and-the 8
point is that there should not be long-time storage cf any
,9, rcdioactivity on Three Mile Island. I think that what we're 20 i
gi talking about is temporary storage for a period of approximately two years, until about 1982 or 1983.
Certainly I would not 12
)
13 ;
wnnt anything I said and I don't think that Tom is saying should bo interpreted as saying that any radioactivity shoG1d be stored 14 ;
on Three Mile Island. I think that would be the worst possible J. S j place to put a storage site for radioactivity, and I think that 16 this committee shc -Id do all it possibly can to get the NRC 17 to work with Met-Ed and with the Department of Energy to get it
- 18 cleaned up and get the radioactivity off the island as soon as 19 20 l possible, and I hope that if time permits we can talk about 21 getting the resins removed.
i l
22 l MR. MORRIS: I was going to mention that as a point of 23 order. I think it's fine to say we don't want storage on the island, but I hope we're going to stay to the one issue of the
!24
.25 water, and not bring in the other s corage into consideration, i
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
l 29 1
and certainly they're a concern to everybody.
1 i
Personally, unless somebcdy comes up with a better way 2
of getting rid of the water, I say store it in the tanks. Now 3
if you ccme along and you have a better place to get rid of it 4
that's going to be safe and not of concern to the public, fine.
e 5
i N
I think we should all listen to that. But if it's a choice of
~
6 e
k 7,
dumping it into the river or leaving it in the tanks on the I
5 8
- island, I knew what my choice would be.
n d
=
94 MS. TRUNK:
But you're worried about Lancaster. I worry i
10 about Middletown. So it's your stress against mine. You're tellincr i
11 me that I should live with mine.
<E MR. MORRIS: Yes, Ann, but I guess what my point would d
12 z
i 1
5 13 be is what will happen to the water stored in the tank? If E
A 14 it leaks, where does it go? It goes into the water that ends up 1
5:
2 15 j going down to the Susquehanna River and being pulled into the w
=
16 l city of Lancaster's water-distribution system.
3*
l I can understand your concern, but I wonder what is the 17 E
threat to Middletown of the water sitting on the island stored E
18 19 in tanks?
E l
20 MS, TRUNK: 3ecause the people of Middletown are worried 21 that it's going to become a dumping site and we're going to be l
22 j
stuck with it, because there's going to be a lot of legal hassle 23 and we're going to end up with it.
24 MR. MINNICK:
Joel?
MR. ROTH: Yes. Before we've already processed the water, 25 l i
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
30 i
j and we're worried about whether we're going to dump it or store 2
it, I'd like to get back to the SDS system itself and maybe 3
disagree a little bit with Tom in saying because Met-Ed said g
that that system can do something that we should let them go 5
ahcad and look at it after it's stored.
4 I for one am not willing to trust Met-Ed to do that i
7; because they said they can do that.
It's already been questioned I
g whether or not a licensing amendment and public hearings would I
g' ba needed before the SDS system could go into effect, and it 3
troubles me a little bit to see Middletown fighting Lancaster 1
right now. I think all of us are interestedcin Lancaster and g,
Middletown and Harrisburg, Newbury township and all the areas.
3 And I'm sort of concerned about allowing utilities to go ahead g!
with the SDS system without, you knew, going into it a little 5
further.
9 I know Lake is sitting out there and Bernie is citting p
out there in the audience frem NRC and there's a lot of g
quastions that I think we all received and answers back and g!
forth. And it just seems to me to give a carte blanche to the 1
3 utility, even though NRC has said they've satisfied our j
quastions, I think our panel should really be considering i
g whather or not we feel a licensing amendment is necessary and 9
whether or not public hearings before.we even talk about what's i
3 going to happen to it. It seems we're forgetting that first step, g
and I'm just wondering if it would be permissible at this time ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
9 31 1
4 I
to ask Bernie or Lake out in the audience if they have any 1
2l answers on that.
MR. MINNICK: Before you do, I want to say something, 3
something that I feel is being totall; overlooked. Ann speaks 4
l about the fear and concern of the resideni.3 of the area and e
5; 3
it's a real concern; it's a real fear.
But in all of the hassle, n
s 6<
e and I'm not saying the SDS system is richt or wrong.
Lord knows,
{
7' I
I don't know that.
It is now over -- what is it? Timewise it'll E
8 n
t 9l soon be two years since the accident occurred, and we're really d
i l
10 l not much further cahead. in getting the site cleaned up than az!
tt !
we were a year ago.
And you know, what you're saying is more delay and more delay, and I think somebody has to say somewhere d
12,
z i
I E
13 l along the line, when do the delays end and when do we get the S
i E
14 !
place cleaned up and get the material out of there and get it i.d.
E 15 out of cur backyards, because we don't want it here?
- s l
8 i
16 i Every roadblock that is thrown into the process, even 3
- d well-intentioned roadblocks, is delaying that and further l
6 17,
y I
18 l aggravating the suspense of the citizens in the area. And somebody i
somewhere has to say it's time to get the job on with.
I'm b
19
!!In 20 '
concerned about that.
MR. MORRIS: Jack, does somebody want to make a motion i
21 ;
(
l 22 i on the SDS system and get that discussed? Ir. personally agree i
23 that wo should move on. I see what the NRC is doing in regard I
24 to chee: Jing.
I've got all this literature, as everybody else i
has, all the questions they've asked, all the concerns they have.
25 I
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
to 32 l!
And from my standpoint I feel that they are being very thorough I
2' in checking the SDS system out and I feel that they feel that 3
when all the questions have been answered, that they are 4
satisfied, I feel as a member of this committee that I am willing 5
to say let's get on with that part of it.
6; As to what happens with the water af ter it's treated, Tl that's a different question, and I do not agree with the interim 1
8 releases by Met-Ed.
But as to the treatment, I'm ready to 9i proceed with some kind of comment or decision on that, on the 10 SDS system itself.
11 MR. MINNICK: Yes, on the system itself.
12 MR. ROTH: I agree and that's why I asked if, since i
i 13 '
Lake and Bernie are sitting there from NRC, to see just where 14 they are at this point on that system.
15,
MR. MINNICK:
I didn't mean to cut you off on your 16 questions to them. I just cfeel that we keep -- as I say,.
17,
we'll soon be two years down the road and we're not very far 18 advanced in getting the place cleaned up. And I'm not trying to b
l19 put anybody down or anything like that.
But we 've soon got to i
! 20 '
get this thing on with.
l
\\
21 !
Is Lake available? Can you come to a mike please?
l 22 !
MR. SYNDER:
For the record, I'm Bernie Snyder. I'm 23 '
the director of the TMI program office for NRC.
24 Joel, your question as I understand it was what are we 25 doing with regard to the SDS?
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
SH 11
$3 1'
MR. ROTE: We receive a lot of the information from 2
Lake on the correspondence between yourselves and Met-Ed, and 3
at that time you said it was 70 percent complete, the SDS was 4
70 percent complete.
g 5
MR.SYNDER: That's what the licensee is telling us, yes.
+
Rj 6,
MR. ROTH: Okay. I guess the question is, is that still R
l 2
7 70 percent, and at this time with 70 percent of it accomplished s
j 8l do you at this point have any feelings toward the successful use d
I 9
z, of that system?
~
^
g 10 MR. SNYDER: Well, we've got outstanding a large number 5
i j
11 '
of questions.
I hope that we've given you everything that we m
p
- 12. !
have on that subject. It was our intent to do that.
And they 2i j
13 l owe us answers to those questions, and we expect some time, i
e g
14,
hopefully by the end of this month they'll. send us their response i
j 15 ;
to all'those questions in the form of a design analysis report.
16 l We're going to go through that. We're going to do the safety g'
i s
17 '
analysis of it and publish our own safety evaluation report, f
5 s
18 'j and we'll make a finding as to the suitableness of it, in I
l 19 )
accordance'with our regulations and what we think is good M
l 20 l engineering practice.
And we would do that at Lome point. Right 21 now we're concentrating on the PEIS and getting that out.
But
(
22 {
we are waiting for the licensee to provide us with their i
l 23 ;
responses to these questions.
We may have further questions 24 once we get them.
(
25 Does that answer your question at all?
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
12 l
3L1 MR. WAGNER: I'd like to make a motion if I may.
1 I
2l MR. MINNICK: Please do.
i 3!
MR. WAGNER: We recommend <that.the approximately 2 million gallons of decontaminated water associated with the 4
clean-up of Three Mile Island Unit 2 be stored initially in tanks 5;
(
to permit accurate assessment of its residual content of 6
~
radioactivity, prior to a decision regarding ultimate disposal.
7 If the NRC approves the use of the SDS, we would 8'
9, encourage that it be used as soon as possible.
1
~
Cur review of the projected levels of radioactivity 10 in the? processed water indicates that no significant hazards it to either public health or the biota of the Susquehanna River 12 1
13 i would result from releasing the decontaminated water under the t
14 '
conditions described in die programmatic environmental impact 15 statement, but we believe that the social, economic. and i
1 is '
psychological impact of che release of the decontaminated water B
has been inadequately addressed at present and until such 17 studies have been completed and the potential socio-economic 5
18 '
1 impact assessed, that we at the present. time have inadequate 19 l b
data on which to make an informed decision as to what should be l
20 m
the ultimate disposal of the water.
I Just don' t ask me to repeat the motion.
i 22 23 MR. MINNICK: You actually-have three points in that, 24 I believe.
l 25 MR. WAGNER: In essence it says the water should be
~
r ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
13
-35 decontaminated as rapidly as possible using the SDS, if that's 1,
2 approved by the NRC.
MR. PALLADDIO: Can we take them one at a time?
3 MR. MDINICK: Can we take that one first? It's given there 4
that the SDS meets all the NRC standards and requirements.
5 e
~n M
6 Anyone have any problems with that?
~
e MR. MORRIS: I second it.
2 7
A i
a MR. MINNICK: Okay, it's been properly moved, seconded E
9 by Mayor Morris.
I'll take a roll call vote.
Joel?
I E
10 4
MR. ROTE: No.
5 5
11 MR. M2iNICK: Henry?
3
- i 12 MR. WAGNER: Yes.
z
=.
E 13 MR. MriNICK: Mayor?
E E
14 '
MR. MORRIS: Yes.
- s.
i.
2 15.
MR. MERiICK: Ann?
i.d-MS. TRUNK: Yes.
16
\\
i MR. MINNICK: Mayor?
i i
17 l
6 E
18 MR. RKID: Yes.
=
E" 19 i
MR. MINNICK: Tom?
1 l
A l
20 DR. CCCH.uN: Yes.
21 i
MR. MINNICK: Doctor?
22 MR. PALLADDIO:
Yes.
l 23 MR. MINNICK: And I will vote yes. I believe that's l
l 24 eight to one.
Now your second point?
MR. WAGNER: The second is that the decontaminated water 25,
I, J
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
36 14 l
1 be stored initially in tanks to permit accurate assessment of its i
2 radioactivity content. prior to a decision about its ultintate 3
disposition.
O!
MR. MINNICK: Questioneto that. We never really have g
dealt, I believe, with Met-Ed's query or plea to separate two 5
H kinds of water.
So what do you mean by the word " decontaminated"?
'3 6'
E i
b 7
Are you talking about --
0; MR. WAGNER: The decontaminated water that I'm referring d
l
=;
9 to is the water that is in the sump of the containment building z
~.g 10 and the water that is contaminated in the clean-up process, E
5 II '
together.
U 12 '
MR. PALLADINO:
That's all water. That's essentially f:
I3 !
all water, isn't it?
LB 5
I4 i
=
MR. WAGNi'R: Well, I don't want to use Tom's analogy.
.q
- }
15 They' re releasing water now that has nothing to do with the x
. d 16 '
accident, and I think they should continue to release it.
Ld i
MR. PALIJDINO: But'that water is also contaminated.
h I7
!=
{
18 Isn't that water also contaminated?
P 19 i
MR. WAGNER: No. To my knowledge they're not releasing 0
any contaminated water at the present time. But they're releasing 2I water.
l 22 )
MR. MINNICK: Water that meets standards, meets the 23 NRC standards.
i I
i 24 MR. PALLADINO: But that's my point. Presumably all this 1
25 water meets their standards.
Otherwise it wouldn't be discharged.
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
15 37 ij I don't understand what we're trying to define here.
I MR. MORRIS: I think we can make a differentiation, 2
though, between water that is now being discharged from water 3
that is now being held and not discharged.
I understand, Mr.
4,
(
Palladino, what you're saying and the water that's now being e
5 2
3 6 i discharged I recently found out has minute traces in it, as a
1 a
Lake explained to me. But if we would refer to that as water E
7l
,~
E, 8j presently being discharged, versus water not presently being d
d 9,
discharged but being stored after processing of Epicore-II or 3.
1 i
E 10 l else ready to be processed.
I 5
11 '
DR. CCCHRAN: Let me offer a suggestion to get past this.
Let's try to pass something along the lines that you've just d
12 l.
Z=
. framed it in item 4, and then come back 5
13 framed it, or as I've 1
2 14 l to the question of exceptions, what will be permitted in the W
15 {
interim, if anything.
I'm just trying to be helpful.
i 16 MR. WAGNER: What is your proposal?
I 32 17 DR. CCCHRAN: My proposal is we take some s' ort of
=
18 l motion, such as the one that's on the table, and then following 19 l that, following a vote on that motion, let's address the issue E
8n 20 ;
of whether or not there will be exceptions while the processing of this water goes forward.
21,
l 22 l MR. PALLADINO: My~ problem is not understanding what the motion is.'If I understood it better, I --
23 l
24 MR. WAGNER: I really find it difficult to see what 25 the problem is. The water containing level -- you can make a ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
38 I
16 l
3 judgment.
I mean if the water's in the sump, there's no question 2;
abou t that. It's clear what that is.
If they wash down a decontaminated wall, that's associated with the decontamination 3
process, and it's not hard to distinguish between water associated 4
5l with the contamination as a result of the accident, the i
decontamination of the accident, ccmpared to other water, such as 6
7 drinking water or toilet water, and things of that sort. I 8'
don't see the problem.
9i MR. PALLADIMO: I can understand it if you want to talk about sump water and you want to talk about the water that's 10 been used in decontaminating the walls.
I can understand that.
11 l
12 !
But you didn't use those words and I was having trouble following you.
13 ;
MR. WAGNER: I said associated with the decontamination
{
14 15 process, believing that that would be contained'.in those words.
16 MR. PALLADINO: I misunderstood, then.
Now what are you gaine to do with that water? You're goi$g to say that no l
17 18 matter how -
19 MR. WAGNER: That wster will be reutilized, as Tem has 20 suggested in his document, that that water will be used as much 21) as possible for the decontamination procest ar.1 it will then be 22 j stored initially in teaks, in the two : 4,c gallon tanks that 23 they have constructed primarily for~tiut purpGse. It will be 24 kept in those tanks and utilized frcm those tanks and when the 25 decontamination process is finished, they will make a measttrement ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
l
17 3d-of how muc 5 radioactivity and what type of radioactivity'is in i
i that water, ad then at that time, which will be two or three 2
3 years from now, at that time a rational and political decision will be made as to what should be done with it.
Again, on the 4
assumption that it should not be stored there. To store it there e
5.
3 N
longer than two or three years I think would present a real j
6 E
7 problem.
I sympathize completely with the people in Middletown.
,j 8l I thihk it would be terrible if in any sense that Three Mile n
d Island becomes a storage site, either short-term or 1cng-term.
9 I.
i E
10 ;
MR. PALLADINO: Well, this is my concern. I appliud our i
i chairman when he speaks about the necessity to get on with the 5
ii
<3 l
d 12 l job. As a matter of fact I don't think we've looked at the stress E_
13 problem correctly. I believe that we would alleviate the stress-
"'=
E 14 l most rapidly by getting the plant cleaned up and getting the a
t.
stuff off the site as soon as possible.
And prolonging the
{
15
^
=
m.
16 '
process by whatever means, I think enhances the public stress.
al 17
.So I have a problem, if once you say that the water is
=
acceptable for disposal, I don't see the difference between 18 5
these various. kinds of. water. If they're not acceptable for.
19 20 disposal then we shouldn't dispose of rhen.
21 i
But that's my problem. I guess you're' going back to the artificial distinction that was - referred to in 'the : report between 22 accident-produced water and non-accident-produced water.
23
.iR. NAGNER: No.
24 i
25 MR. PALIADI'IO : Nell, it sounds like that way. It sounds i
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
18 i
40:-
1 1
like that water which is in the sump, that water which you use for decontamination, you're going to store it no matter how 2
clean you get it and that which is not used in those processes, 3
you're going to let go as long as it neets the criteria. And I 4
i 5l have trouble with that.
.a A
i N
MR. MORRIS: You know, it's strange that there are i
3 6
communities that have a water shortage right now and I don't j
7 i
y g
see anybody knocking on the door of TMI, asking them if they would i
n give them that water that is as clean as. you say it is.
9 i
l 10 l MR. PALLADINO: I'111 buy it.
E!
11 MR. MORRIS : You may have it if you'd like it.
l D
l d
12 MR. MUTNICK: May I interject a question? Is there a I
z=
i problem with Tom's motion if it referred to, on page -- if it j
13,
L E
14 '
referred to the accident-generated water as defined in the
- a l :
agreement between Lancaster and the NRC?
Henry's motion, I'm 1 5 E
15 :
=
sorry. I said Tom. If your motion stipulated that, is there a 16 l i D i
i d I y 17 problem? Do we have a proble.a that way?
5 E
18 MR. WAGNER: No, not at all.
I would like to take ten l :
! E 19 seconds to respond to the dean. I really agree with you totally.
1 =
l M 20 If it were not for the psychological, social and econcmic factors, 21 '
I would release the water absolutely and not store it at all.
I So this is a proble= that you have to struggle with. It's a 22,
23 problem that I struggle with --
24 MR. PALLADINO: Yes, I haven't heard of any econcmic 25 problems.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
t f
19 di I
MR. MAGNER: This is what I've struggled with and have ji come up, in my opinion, that it should be stored so that we can 2
proceed with the clean-up without this potential shock.
It's 3
i I
cone _vable that the release of the water would have no more 4l i
e 5
impact than the release of the krypton, but it's also conceivable i
'n 3
6l that it's too risky. The perceived risk, the perception of what N
k 7l that water would do, may be so severe that I think that maybe I
8, you wouldn't want to do it.
I may be totally wrong, but I think a
d d
9 it'= too risky to take that course of action.
Y
\\
E 10 l MR. MDINICK: Mayor Reid.-
~
_z n
MR. REID: If this water is going to be so clean after 3
- 5 12 it's decontaminated, for example you wouldn't want to move it 35c s
13 !
the way it is now because it's so highly contaminated.
There's E
l the risk of accident or something like that, which could cause E
14,
M E
i 2
15 -
contamination over a large area.
But it's going to be so clean a
=
l 16 '
after it is decontaminated, why do you have to put it in the 3
m b^
17 river, or why do you have to store it on site? Why don't you just w
5 18 ship it out of there then?
f 19 MR. WAGNER: Well, you can ship it out. In fact I can X
20 give you the figures if you ent about how many trucks it would 21 take and how much it would cost.
22 MR. REID: Regardless of how many trucks, it's going to t
23 ease the psychological impact of the people in the area, so 24 why not just ship it out on tankers?
25 MR. WAGNER: That might be the right decision and --
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
42
?
I MR. REID: So if it's going to be clean after it's j
decontaminated, the best thing would be not put it in the river, 2
l 3]
and not store it on site.
l MR. WAGNER: That may be the right decision but I think 4!
i it should be made in two years rather than at the present time.
e 5
A
\\.
m 6'
MR. MINNICK: Mayor, I think that is one of the eight recommendations that have to be -- I'm not sure that eight is the E
7,
~
\\
w E.
8!
right number, but that have to be considered: shipping the c
d contaminated liquid off-site for processing or disposal --
c 9
2i 10 l MR. PALLADINO:
What are you referring to?
E i
h 11 MR. MINNICK: I'm looking at answers to frequently a
d 12,
asked questions about the clean-up.
So that is an alternative.
z=
3 13 MR. REID: Well, there we're killing two birds with Si E
14 l one stone. We're not affecting the drinking water of Lancaster, a'
I 15 nor are we causing a problem in the borough of Middletown by 5
I having it stored on site.
a_.-16 I
t c
l 17 l DR. COCHRAN: I think that the recommendation I would j
l g
$i 18 make and I think Henry would support is to address that issue
=-
i 19,
af ter we 've cleaned the water up and the atoms and the volume N
9 I
l M
20 of water and so forth, and make that determination dcwn the road, i
21 l and in the interim let's get on with cleaning the water up and l
l 22 storing it in tanks on the site for that period of time.
1 23 :
MR. REID: WEll, why would you need to store it if it's i
24 clean?
25 DR. CCCHRAN: Then you're supporting Dean Palladino.
l t
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
1 43 21 1
i MR. PArnn";o:
I'm caught in the middle.
If it's so 2i clean, then we shouldn't eve to worry about storing it. And if 3
it's so clean, we shouldn't have to worry about getting rid of it.
4 I'm just trying to understand the nature of the division of.this e
5 s
water that we're about to vote on. That's what I'm having N
3 6
1 trouble with. If it's clean enough to do one thing with it's n
R 7
clean enough to do anothing thing with.
And in trying to define n
E 8
}
certain kinds of waters that get this clean and certain kinds of d
9 y
waters that get the same cleanliness is where-I'm having trouble E
10 i
with your =otion.
E 11 MR. REID: But being clean, as far as you're talking d
12 j
about, Dean, is not clean as far as the people of Lancaster are N
13 l E
concerned.
==
14 O
MR PALLADI:iO ' Ch, if it's not clean enough to be
=
2 15 potable then I don't think it's clean enough. All I'm trying to y
i 16 get to, you want to divide the water into two parts, and yet i
17 y
they both come out to the same level of contamination or 5
18 E
decontamination. ~4 hat I'm having trouble with is defining those I
19 A
two parts and why you're doing it.
20 j
MR. MINNICK: Can I try to add scmething to that? In 21 this whole process, one could take the very real position of 22 2
saying the psychological i= pact or the socio-economic impact are 23 really not worthwhile considering. The water meets the standards 24 and we should clean it up and release it i= mediately and get it 25 done with. And that would probably really, the bottom line, be I
i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
44 22 the best th_ng to do.
But what we have to understand, I belie've, is that there are people who in their own minds will never be convinced that that water is what we define as clean, and will 3
never be accepted. And I think we have --
i l
MR. PALLADINO: Well, that'll be true two years from now.
i MR. MINNICK: I agree with you but I think we have to 3
0 have some compassion for those people. We cannot run roughshod n_
7 q
just automatically over them, as tempting as it might be, given we had that authority to do that. I think we have to have some d
i 9
ig compassion. for the problems they have gone through in this whole
- z
=
thing. I 11 l
=<U I've said before as a panel member, because I don't 12 z
h live quite as close as Ann or Bob, I may not have in my own mind
=
13 the same fear that they or some of the members of their communitv
=
=
14 w
M have, but we've got to be cognizant of that fear and we've 15 w
l got to have some sympathy for them. We can't shove everything 16,
.c t
u i
d down their throats. I think that's the problem.
I y
17 '
w MR. PALLADINO: You misunderstand me. I'm as compassionate w
18
=
~
as you are. I didn't understand the motion. We're trying to say (g
9 f
=
M I
we're going to divide the water into two parts, and they're 1
20 l
both going to meet certain standards.
And I was trying to g
i j
u derstand what you wanted. As a matter of fact, my feeling was 22 l
n em e.
's clean enough to dump, I don't have to 23 1
worry about it being stored.
i 24 MR. WAGNER: I don't know, maybe Mr. Arnold or Mr. Hoovey 25 r
l l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
i
l 23 l db jl can tell us the amount of water that goes through Three Mile I
2j Island in a cay, in terms of drinking water and toilet water 3
and things of that sort. It's clear that it would be impossible 4
to store all the water that goes through Three Mile Island. We only want to store water that's associated with the accident and e
5 M
N the decontamination process, againa, not because it's not safe 8
6, e
to release it but because we think it's unwise to release
]5 7
fg it because we think it's unwise to release it, because of the n
l d
=
9 reasons that we mentioned.
if 10 I'm not saying what I think should be done in two or E
5 11 three years, but I think things certainly change in two or three
<3 d
12 ';
years, and I wouldn't predict that everybody is going to be 3=
2N 13 l thinking exactly the same way three years from now as they are now.
er
=
I 14 m
=
15 x
3 h'
17 0
5 l
w 18 i
?
C i
19 H
l '
20 21 22 i
D
^
24 25 i
f l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
l
46 1
HR. HINNICH Hay I read the --
2 MR. PALLADIN04 If you go with the motion as you 3
restated it there, I probably would have no problem with it.
s 4
MR. MINNICHs As I had restated it?
May I read 5
that definition?
6 MR. COCHRAN4 Let Henry resta te it.
7 MR. MINNICH:
Okay, Henry, go ahead.
Put your 8 -motion on the table.
9 HR. WAGNER:
The water that I said was to decontaminated water associated with the cleanup of the 11 Three Mile Island Unit 2.
12 NR. COCHRAN:
Read the whole motion again, and 13 let's do it again.
14 MR. WAGNER:
That the approximately 2 million 15 gallons of decontaminated water associated with the cleanup of Three Mile Island Unit 2 be stored initially in tanks to 16 17 permit accurate assessment of its content of radioactivity 18 prior to a decision regarding ultimate disposal.
l 19 MR. HINNICHs And that decision interjecting would 20 come after, I believe you mentioned, the proper 21 environmeDtal impact statements and all that.
22 MR. WAGNER:
Yes.
Well, I didn 't say 23 environmental impact statement.
HR. MINNICHs Public hearing.
24 25 ER. WAGNER:
I think public input, public and ALDER $CN REPCRTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2342
u7 1
scientific input.
I didn't mean to specify that it would 2
require or would not require an environmental impact 3
statement or something of that sort.
But it would be 4
reconsidered by the public and by the political leaders as 5
well as scientists.
6 HR. MINNICH Does everybody understand that 7
motion?
Is there a second to the motion?
Joel?
8
- 53. ROTH:
No, no second.
Just a point, a 9
question on it, please.
to Is it possible, Henry, to put any time frame on 11 that?
What Bob is saying I can concur, and what Ann is 12 saying, we are going to store and it is a open-ended 13 storage; and I hate to see us go on the record on an 14 open-ended storage, as it now seems.
I 15 MR. COCHRANs Joel, let's try to split these up 16 into separate recommendations.
I mean if there is a problem 17 there, let's address that as a separate recommendation l
l 18 rather than '.ry to tie up our whole discussion here in a series of 50 zillion amendments to one recommendation.
19 20 MB. ROTH I think that's an opinion, Iom, and if 21 Henry would see that it was possible, I'm not sure that it's 22 trying to tie anything up and trying to filibuster or.tryinJ 23 to do anything of that nature.
l l
l 24 HB. COCHRANs I'm not suggesting it is.
25 MR. ROTH:
Wait, let me finish.
I'm just merely i
ALDER 5oN REPCRTING CCMPANY !NC.
400 VIRGANIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON. O.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
48 1
stating tha t as we are vo ting on it, it*would then take 2
another motion, it would take a second and then a vote to 3
even talk about that, when we could do it maybe at one swoop 4
rather than two.
5 HR. MINNICH:
What is your proposal, Joel?
I like 6
your thought.
7
- 53. ROTHs Well, it just seems to me that we are 8
leavin's it very open-ended.
We are saying store it until 9
which time.
What happens if there are problems with the SDS 10 systen, it goes on the bilnk and tha t water sits and sits and sits while another method _ is tried to be figured out.
11 12 It just seems to me that to get on with it, and I 13 sgree with getting on with it, that some type of time f rame 14
-- and I would really like to hear, A, how long it's going 15 to take to process that water through SDS again from either 16 MRC or Het.Ed, and to see how long it would take.to fill 17 those tanks before they could be measured.
I need that 18 information.
19 5R. REID And you also could have a political 20 issue there.
Right now I think -- I could be wrong -- that no state is accepting anything from Unit 2, so how long do 21 22 we go?
23
- 53. ROTH:
Could we hear from 24 HR. MINNICH:
Dr. Snyder or Bob Arnold.
Could 25 someone tell us, if the go-ahead were given tomorrow to ALDERSoN REPORTING CCMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., $.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
49 1
operate the SDS system, how long would it take you to 2
process tha water, approximately?
3 MR. SNYDERs Mr. Arnold is better ab3,e to answer 4
that question since it is his system.
5 MR. ARNOLD 4 I think that based on the experience 8
we had with the Epicore 2, that a reasonable estimate of the 7
duration that the SDS would be operating to process the 8
water in the containment building sump and the water in the 9
reactor coolant system would be on the order of perhaps 10 10 or 12 months.
11 MR. MINNICH:
What was the other question, Joel?
12 You had two quertions.
13 MR. ROTHz Wh, you are saying then, those tanks 14 would basically be, to put it simplistically, would be 15 filled at that time or you would have the processed water in 16 the tanks after, say, 12 months, if I understand that 17 correctly.
18 MF. ARNOLD Well, that's correct with regard to 19 those initial volumes, that they would be completed in the 20 processing.
But I think probably what Gale is getting ready to also remind is that as we proceed with other cleanup 21 l
1 22 activities there at the site, some of that water will be f
I recycled through the plant systems for additional cleanup l
23 efforts, decontamination ef forts, and there really will be 24 an ongoing utilization of perhaps the SDS and the Epicore 2 25 ALDERSCN REPCRTWG COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W, WASWNGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
50 1
beyond the cleanup of that initial ";lume of water, but we 2
will be dealing with, of course, much lower levels of 3
contamination.
4 MR. MINNICHs Which really, if I say, Bob, which 5
reslly comes back to the questions that were being asked by 6
Dr. Palladino and by Mayor Reid, the discussion we had at 7
the last meeting, that it doesn 't make good sense to take 8
clean water and dirty it to clean up the building.
The 9
recycled water should be used to clean up the building, so 10 ve are really talking possibly quite a lengthy storage
$1 period while all of this activity is going on.
12 Is that a fair assessment?
13 MR. ARNOLD:
Well, I think it is, but I think it 14 also would need to be ne ced in terms of the committee's 15 overall deliberations that the total volume of water isn't 16 needed for that recycling purpose.
Some portion of it, 17 perhaps half a million gallons, will be quite ample for the 18 activities that we see needing to recycle the water.'
19 MR. MINNICH:
20 MR. REIDs Now, I could possibly live with the 21 storage until the entire place is decontaminated, but beyond 22 that, when you say storage, does it go beyond that po in t, if 23 it takes two years,.we._will say, to clean everything down 24 rather than draw in clean water.
After, say, two years, 25 then that water has to gC.
You clean that up and you get ACERSoN REPORTING CCMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINi A AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. 0.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
51 1
rid of it.
2 HR. WAGNER:
Mayor, could I make a suggestion?
If 3
ve can vote on the motion that I made, I think it would be 4
very helpful if we could have a motion with t spect to 5
long-te rm storage.
This is --
6 3R. REID No, I can't go along with you motion 7
because there is nothing in your motion that puts a dead end 8
on storace.
9 ER. MINNICH:
Tom.
10
'HR. COCHRANs I would like to ask Bob a couple of 11 questions.
Would you have any problem providing tank 12 capacity for the invertory that you foresee, not only what 13 exists now but what might be added, in any thought of 14 decontamination activities, which islJhat I estimate to be 15 in the neighborhood of 1.6 million gallons?
16 ER. ARNOl'.<
1et me check with Gale on my 17 reco1~ action of inventory of tank volume.
18 (Pause.)
I think, Tom, that the most helpf ul answer there 19 20 is that at about 1.6 ve are at the limit of what we can 21 practically store without it starting to intarfere with 22 other plant activities.
There may be more volume available 23 in the plant thanothat,but not by very much, and the moving 24 of water around and the operation of systems makes the 1.6 25 million about the upper limit of what we could store without ALDEA$oN REPORTING CCMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE. S.W. WASHINGTCN, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
52 1
impacting on cleanup activities.
2 ER. COCHRAN Well, do you have any problem with 3
this recommendation of centrally storing the water on site 4
while you. proceed with the decontamination activities and 5
not releasing any of this water, as we have defined it, as 6
vater associated with the cleanup?
7 MR. ABN01D :
I have a little bit of problem with 8
the concept of the water associated with the cleanup because 9
I think that that would be legitimately subject to a variet7 10 of interpretations by different people who look at the 11 activities we have going on there, and I as a little bit 12 concerned about now having a more rigorous distinction 13 between these two kinds of water, as Dr. Palladino was 14 talking about,what determines which catego ry the water 15 would fall within.
18 But I do not have difficulty with the concept that 17 the water that was the scurce of the concern on the part of 18 the downstrean users as not being discharged at this time,
19 with providing storage for some interim period of time until hopefully what I guess I would like to see is a better 20 21 understanding on the part of the public and confidence that 22 that does represent a threat to their health and safety.
23 I think that we are not in a bind for.the next 24 year or so in taking that kind of an approach.
My crystal 25 isn't any better or any clearer than the rest of you as to ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. 0.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
53 1
what some of the likely developments are two years from nov 2
or something like that.
3 MR. EINNICH4 Okay. Doctor?
4 HR. PALLADINO:
To try to follow up on what Mayor 5
Reid said, might we be able to put on this motion the 8
concept that if the stcr:ge of this water is to exceed a 7
period of two years, that NBC, and I would like to also have DER of our own state examine the situation to make sure that 8
9 the continued storage, if that is what is recommended, is 10 appropriate and in the best interest of the public health 11 and safety.
In other words, rather than try to set a deadline 12 13 now that it is only so long, get NRC and the DER on behalf 14 of Pennsylvania to get together and review the situation rad determine whether continued' storage is still in the best 15 18 interest of the people.
17 MR. MINNICH.
Go ahead.
18 XS. TRUNK 4 That could drag on forever.
19 MR. PALLADINO:
No, I said in two years.
9 20 MS. TRUNKt But I mean the NRC coming in and 21 ree valua ting and deciding it.
22 MR. PALLADINO:
- dell, otherwise I don't know how 23 to set a time limit, and I like the concept of the time 24 limit but I don't know that two years is right or if three 25 yea rs are right, but I don't want anybody to forget it.
ALDER $oN REPORTING CoWPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON. O.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
54 1
That's it.
2 MB. MINNICH4 Go ahead, Mayor.
3 HR. REID:
That's true, because if things go in 4
the future the way they have been coing in the past, it has 5
been two years and how far are we down the road?
So it is 6
hard to say how long that water would be stored.
You don't 7
know what Het Ed is going to run into.
But I think some limit has to be placed on that 8
9 storage.
to MR. MINNICH:
May the Chair make a recommendation,
11 please. I appreciate all the points being made here, but I 12 dould suggest that we deal with Henry's motion first and 13 then we deal with the time issue, Mayor, if you are prepared 14 to make a motion affecting the time.
I have some problems f
15 with trying to do that, which I would like to address but 16 not at this point.
17 I think if we tie the tine to Her,ry's motion,-it 18 would force me to vote no with the time time limit there.
I i
l 19 would like to deal with the time limit separately.
20 HR. WAGNER:
May I say one thing?
Mayor, it is it
)
21 implicit in my motion.
What I said was that the water be 22 stored initially to permit accurate assessment prior to a l
23 decision regarding ultimate disposal.
That certainly 24 implies thst you should go right down the line and do 25 something.
It does not imply, and the record can state,
ALDERSON REPCRTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRG1NIA AVE., S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
55 1
there is nothing in that motion, the intent in that motion 2
is not to have.that be a long-ters storage in those tanks, 3
which I think would be very, very bad.
4 I think it is implicit in those words that it is.
5 to be decontaminated, it is to be stored, it is to be 6
evaluated, and then with more public input, a decision is 7
sade as to what is to be done with it.
That does not imply 8
in any sense that it would be stored any longer than is 9
absolutely essential.
to
- 53. EINNICH.
Henry, one other problen, I think, 11 should be corrected.
You have used the figure of 2 million 12 and Tom has used the figure 1.6.
'4 hat is our approximate 13 total that we really want to deal with in the motion?
14 3R. WAGNER:
I think it's hard to say precisely.
15 It is somewhere between 1.6 and 2 million.
18 MR. COCHRAN Let me just comment.
I spent some 17 time trying to unravel those numbers, in part on the phone 18 with Mr. Hoovey and reviewing the inf orma tion tha t was 19 presented at one of our previous meetings, and I'm sort of convinced that T.6 is not a bad estima te.
I think 1.6 to 2 20 1.6 or at 21 is just as good an estimate for our purposes, least less than 2 million or something to that effect.
I 22 don't think that precise number is very important 4
z3 24 The water we are referring to in that inventory, 25 whether it is 1.6 or 2, is the reactor coolant systea, which ALDEASCN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (232) 554 2345
56 1
I estimate at 96,000 gallons; reactor building sump, 700,000 2
gallons; the water that has already been processed and is 3
stored on tanks, which is 732,000 gallons; and the water 4
that is stored in tanks but has not been processed, and that 5
is 60,000 gallons.
6 Now, there may be some additional fresh water 7
added during decontamination activities, but I think one of 8
our recommendations eventually, at least I hope would be to 9
minimize that by recycling, which everyone agrees to.
10
- 53. 5INNICHs So don't we say the approximately 11 1.6 million gallons.
All right.
12 Is there a second to that motion?
13 MR. COCHRANs I second it.
14 HR. MINNICHs It has been properly moved and 15 properly seconded.
Again we will take the roll call vote.
16 Joel?
17 MS. WAGNER:
Could we just --
18
- 53. HINNICH Ch, excuse me.
Go ahead.
Read it 19 again, Henry.
20 NE. WAGNERs Yes.
That the approximately 1.6 21 million gallon of decontaminated water associated with the 22 cleanup of Three Mile Island Unit Number 2 he stored 23 initially in tanks to perait accurate assessment of its 24 residual content of radioactivity prior to a decision 25 regarding. ultimate disposal.
AL.CERSCN REPoRUNG CoWPANY. !NC.
400 VIRGINLA ave. S.W., WASHINGTCN O.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
I 57 1
MR. MINNICHs Has everybody got i t no w ?
2 MR. PALLADIN0s And we are going to come back and 3
talk about the time issue.
4 HR. MINNICHs That is nnr recommendation.
I know S
the Mayor is concerned about that.
6 Joel?
7 MR. ROTHs Yes.
8 MR. MINNICHs Henry?
9 MR. WAGNERs Yes.
10 ER. MINNICHs Mayor?
11 MR. MORRISs Yes.
12 HR. HINNICHs Doctor?
13 MR. PALLADIN0s I'll say yes.
14 HR. MINNICHs Tom?
15 DR. COCHRAN Yes.
16 MR. MINMICHs Mayor?
We are going to come back 17 and discuss the time issue, Mayor.
18 ER. REIDs Okay, yes.
19 ER. MINNICHs Anne?
20 MS. TRUNKS Okay.
21
- 52. MINNICHs And I vote res.
22 Okay, that takes care of that issue, and then you 23-had a third one; but bef ore we get to that, I would like to 24 deal with the Mayor's concern on the time issue.
25 Mayor, do you have any kind of motion you care to ALDERSoN REPoRTINo COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W, WASHINGTON. DA 20024 (202) 554 2345
~
58 1
sake in that regard?
2 MR. RE!Da Well, I would like to place a time 3
limit of two years, but the problem is we don't know what is 4
going to happen within that two-year period.
You don't knov
~
5 what is going to happen to the SDS system.
There might be 8
some complications there.
If you want to polish it a little 7
further, the Epicore System, you might have a probles 8
there.
So putting a time limit on it is going to be rather 9
difficult, bu't I think a time linit has to be placed on it 10 because 11 MR. EINNICH:
And it -- excuse me.
I didn 't mean 12 to cut you off.
Go ahead.
M3 HR. REID:
Because if you don't, I think, like 14 Ers. Trunk said, there would be the water, then the resins, 15 then possibly +.he fuel.
Everything is going to be stored 18 there.
And we will probably run into a political issue with 17 some of the other states, who is going to accept the 18 con taminated material from Unit 2.
Everyone is going to throw their hands up and say we're frightened of it. So it 19 20 is going to be a probles.
If we can eliminate a few things at a tim e, first 21 22 of all the water, getting rid of that and not having it 23 stored there, andueventually work oui something to get rid 24 of the resins and probabi! the spent fuel and other 25 contasinated articles.
ALOERSCN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W, WA$HINGTCN, D.C. 200:4 (202) 554 2345
59 1
ME. MINNICBs Bob, would it might be best to 2
address your concern by attacking it from another angle, 3
that is, that a action would te made somehow worded tha t 4
would in effect say that this panel does not want the 5
permanent storage on site and that every eff ort be made by 6
the NHC and by Met Ed to remove this water as expeditiously i
7 as possble in the shortest time f rame possible.
8
- 53. HEIDs Well, that could be five years, six 0
yea rs, seven years.
to MB. MINNICHs Well, I realize that, but your point 11 of -- you know, I'm afraid if you try to really pin it down 12 to a time frame, there are a couple things.
Number one, wha t is a proper time frame, which no one really, I think, 13 14 can tell us at this soment.
Number two, what happens if 15 they don't meet that time frame?
16 MB. WILLIAMSON:
Mr. Chairman, would there be any l
17 problem with an annual review by this bcdv' l
18 MR. MINNICH:
Ihat might ce 19
- 53. MORRIS That is a good question.
That is How long will this -body exist?
Is 20 what I was going to ask.
there any length of time to which we have been --
21 l
MR. MINNICH:
Let me read the letter.
22
- 33. COCHEANs I think the letter is probably l
23 24 irrelevant.
The Republicans in the Congress tried to eliminate this body in the last month and they were 25 ALCER$CN REPORTING COMPANY. tNC.
400 VIRGNA AVE, S.W. WASHINGTCN. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
60 1
persuaded that that wouldn't be such a good idea.
2 ER. WIILIAMSON4 Perhaps the motion could speak 3
to some other group, subject to annoni review by this body or other appropriate, either specific or general information 4
5 as to an organization.
6 MR. MCRRISa Well, I hate to jump in again, but s
7 what Ion just said did not answer my question.
What you are 8
saying is there is a threat that the so-called Republicans,
9 of which I as one --
10 (General laughter.)
11 MR. MORRIS:
-- will eliminate this committee.
12 That didn't answer it.
Wha t was the charge that we were 13 given when we were established, without worrying at this 14 point about whether we will be disbanded by the group that --
15 ER. TRAVERS:
Mayor Horris, maybe I can answer te that.
The panel was formed originally for the duration of 17 cleanup activities at Three Mile Island.
18 3R. MORRIS:
Which at this particular point means 19 that we are supposed to be a body for some four, five years i
20 or something.
So an annual review by this body would be
(
l 21 appropriate, as far as I as concerned.
-I think it is a good 22 r ecom menda tion.
MB. PALLADIN0s Y es, that.. sounds good.
The only 23 24 reason I went back to NRC and DER was because I didn't know 25 that we were going to be in existence that long.
I would ALOER$CN REPCRTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
61 1
have 2
VOICE:
'Je might not personally, but hopefully 3
there will be a panel.
4 MR. MINNICH:
We or our successors will be 5
involved.
Do you sint to make the motion?
6 MR. M0".fIS:
I would like to make the motion that 7
the term of storage of the water on the island be reviewed l
8 on an annual basis by this advisory committee.
i 9
MR. MINNICH:
Is there a second to that motion?
10 MR. ROTH:. I'll second it.
11 MR. REID:
I'll second the motion.
12 MR. ROTH: Go ahea d, let the Mayor.
13 MR. MINNICH:
Okay, Joel defers to Mayor Reid for 14 th e se co nd.
15 MR. MORRIS:
Did you want to make the' motion, 16 Mayor Reid, yourself ?
You are welcome to.
17 MR. REID:
No, you did it.
No.
i 18 MR. MINNICHs Properly moved and seconded.
Is it l
necessary to take a roll call vote or can I just ask for a 19 l
20 consenting vote from the panel?
21 All those in favor, say "aye."
(There was a chorus of " ayes.")
22 MR. MINNICH: Nays?
s.ge:
23 (There was no response.)
24 25 MR. MINNICHs The " ayes" have it and the motion is l
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMP ANY. INC.
f 400 VMGIN4A AVE., S.W. W ASHINGTcN, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
62 1
carried.
2~
Thank you.
That was very good.
3 I might interject to you I did see and perhaps 4
many of you also have seen that the Governor has announced 5
that he is exploring a low level radiation disposal site not 6
only here in this state but he is conferring with two or 7
three other states to meet the concept of the legislation 8
that we are advised at earlier.
9 HR. COCHRAN:
Are they looking at Three Mile 10 Island?
11 (General laughter.)
12 MR. BINNICH:
I hope not.
Okay.
13 N ow, Henry, you had one more point in your 14 original motion.
15 MR. WAGNER:
No, that's it.
16 MR. MINNICH:
Is that it? That covers it?
17 ER. WAGNER:
That covers it.
Those two cover it.
l 18 Those three cover it.
l 19 MR. EINNICH:
Okay.
Tom?
20 MR. COCHRANs I would like to offer the motion, 21 the Recommendation Number 3 in the dra f t, to the extent 22 practicable Het Ed/GPU should minimize additional water 23 requirements by recycling processed water to the fullesta-n 24 extent practicable.
25 MR. MINNICH Which they have stated they are in ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 WRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 564 2346
63 1
accord with and I don 't think will give them any problem.
2 You made that motion.
Is there a second to the 3
motion?
4 MR. REID:
Second.
5 3R. MINNICH:
Seconded by Mayor Reid.
l 6
All those in favor of the motion, indicate such by 7
saying "aye."
8 (There was a chorus of " ayes.")
9 HR. HINNICH:
Any opposed?
10 (There was no response.)
11 HB. MINNICHa The " ayes" carry and the motion is 12 passed.
13 HE. COCHRAN:
I have another one that I hope will he noncontroversial,.and that is the Recommendation Number 1 14 15 that radioactive contaminants excttpt tritium in the 16 unprocessed water should be reconcentrated and immobilired 17 as expeditiously as possible consistent with existing 18 regulatory requirements.
19
- 53. WAGNEHs Question.
The word " existing" l
1 20 bothers me because the --
1 -
27 3R. COCHRAN Strike the word " existing."
22 MR. WAGNER:
Thank you.
l HR. 3INNICH Strike the word " existing" befare 1
23 i
24
" regulatory"?
f 25 MR. COCHRAN:
Yes.
ALCERSCN AEPoRTING COMP ANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASMihGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2346
l 6u 1
MR. MINNICH:
Okay.
2 Is there a second to that motion?
3 MR. REIDs Second.
4 MR. MINNICH:
Properly moved and seconded.
5 MR. MOBRIS Discussion, maybe?
6 MR. MINNICH:
Discussion, yes. Go ahead.
7 MR. MORR IS :
What is meant by the radioactive 8
contaminants in the unprocessed water should be 9
reconcentrated?
Are you talking about the SDS system or 10 what?
11 MR. COCHRANs I'm not specifying which system. I 12 would presume it would, on the basis of our earlier motion, 13 would be the SDS, and perhaps with polishing by Epicore 2.
14 But the sense of that recommendation is to get on with the 15 job as expeditiously as possible.
16 MR. MINNICH:
Mayor?
17 MR. REIDs That's the motion.
Go ahead.
18 MR. MINNICH Any more discussion ?
Any further 19 discussion on the motion?
20 Is it necessary to take a roll call vote?
21 All those in f avor of the motion, ray "are."
(There was a chorus of " ares.")
22 23 MR. MINNICH:
Any opposed?
l 24 (There was no response.)
25 MR. MINNICHs The " ayes" have it and the motion is l
AI.DERSCN REPCRTING
- CMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGINIA A%E S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
65 1
carried.
2 Anything further?
s 3
Yes, Mayor.
4 ER. REIDs Getting back to the motion that I was-5 supposed to make and Art made --
6 (General laughter.)
7 MR. HOBRIS:
I'm sorry, Sob.
let the record show 8
that remark.
9 (General laughter.)
to 5B. REID:
What do we do if what we recommended 11 isn't being followed?
In other words, the. yearly inspection 12 and so forth.
What do we do now?
Ee said we should have 13 this yearly inspection, but what do we do if --
14 M3. MINNICH:
Okay.
Can I make a suggestion, Bob?
15 M3. REID:
Yes.
16 NB. MINNICH:
I would suggest tha t we direct Bill l
l 17 that on your calendar one year from today, approximately,
[
18 that issue should be properly notated so that, number one, l
19 we are reminded next year this time that we must take this 20 issue up again.
Number two, if at that time -- are you 21 ref erring to what if nothing ha s ree ~'y happened; when we 22 look at it, nothing has occurred?
l 23 MR. 3EID:
No, that they didn't follow the 2.
recommendations.
1 i
25
- 52. MINNICH:
They, NRC?
I ALDERSCN REPORTING COMPANY,INC '
400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W, W ASHINGToN. 0.C. 20024 (202) 564 2346
66 1
MR. REID:
The NRC and, we will say, Met Ed.
2 HR. MINNICRs Well, I think that gets back to the 3
o riginal meeting, Bob, when I think while it wa=n 't a vote 4
but seemed to be somewhat of a feeling, I won't say a 5
consensus, that number one, we didn't want to be a rubber 6
stamp.
I think at that time we would then be faced with the 7
decision of since our input seems not to be worth such, then 8
the question must be asked is the panel worthwhile pursuing.
9 It would be my feeling that if that is the case 10 and if that is our perception, then there is no use in 11 wasting our time and we say as well just stop serving.
12 Now,that won't solve the problem of the cleanup 13 or anything lik e tha t, but I don't see any need for us to 14 continue then.
15 MR. WILLIAMSGNs Mr. Chairman, the most direct is answer to Mayor Reid's question might be found in the title 17 of the committee.
It is an advisory panel.
t l
18 ER. MINFICHs Tha t's right, which does mean that 19 they do not have to follow our recommendation, you are 20 exactly right; but we would hope that somewhere along the l
21 line we see some of our recommendations being seriously I
22 considered and perhaps even undertaken.
23 MR. MORRIS:
It would certainly be nice if at 24 th e se three-hour meetings that we have -- this is the fourth one and we have two more scheduled -- but we are not just 25 ALCERSON REPCRTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINtA AVE S.W WASHINGTCN, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
67 1
spinning our wheels.
2 MR. MINNICH: That's right.
That's exactly right.
3 ES. TRUNK Could I ask a question?
4 NR. MINNICH:
You sure may, Anne.
5 MS. TRUNK:
What happens if Mayor Reid a'nd I are 6
not on this panel and there is somebody from Earyland or 7
Washington who says keep it there, you know, it's safe for 8
ten years, let 's keep it stored there.
What happens then?
9 MR. REID:
Then we should be standing right there 10 in front of that mike at every one of those meetings.
11 MR. MINNICH:
You are right.
12 NH. REID:
Every meeting that they have.
13 3R. MINNICHs Further, Anne, it is my 14 understanding that if you or Mayor Reid are not on the panel 15 there would be a person that would replace you from your 18 approrizate area, so hopef ully they would be speaking in 17 like voice.
l 18 Tom?
i 19 MR. COCHRANs I have a further recommendation that 20 may require some discussion.
We have not yet made any 21 recommesdations that address how an-;h processing or concentration of the activity should occur by whatever i
22 l
proces;s is ultimately decided upon, and I would therefore l
23 like to offer as a recommendation the Recommendation Number 24 25 5 in the draft on page 14 and 15, with the following and l
I ALDER $CN AEPCRTING COMPANY, LNC, 400 VIRG6NIA AVE, S.W, WASHINGTON. DA 20024 (202) 554 2345
68 1
give some discussion as to how those numbers were derived.
2 MR. MINNICH4 I would hope so.
I would have asked 3
that question, yes.
You are saying 4
MR. COCHRANs I'll just read the recommendation.
5 The total inventory of the principal radionuclides of 6
concern in the processed wa ter should not b e allowed to 7
exceed (and should be reduced as far below these limits as 8
practicable), and the li11ts ares tritium, approximately 9
3000 curies, and you really have no control over that 10 isotopes strontium 89 and strontium 90, 1/10 of a curies 11 cesium 134, 2/10.of a curie; cesium 137, 5/10 of a curie.
12 MR. MINNICH:
Fine.
13 Let's take a break of about five or ten minutes 14 and come back and discuss that.
15 MR. COCHRANs All right.
1a (Brief recess.)
17 18 l
19 20 l
21 l
l 22 l
23 24 25 I
s ALCERSCN REPORTING CoWPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
69 1
ER. MINNICH:
Now, then, when we left, Tom had 2
suggested that we discuss his Item 5.
3 We must have -- somebody else must have their 4
system on.
We're getting feedback.
Does anybody else have 5
their system on?
Okay.
6 That we discuss Item 5 for the purpose of 7
considering it at. some poin t in time as a notion.
8 Is that correct, Tom?
9 ER. COCHRAN:
Yes.
10 ER. MINNICH:
Okay.
11 Now, Doc, I think you have a comment.
12
- 53. PALLADIN04 I would like to reserve on the 13 numbers.
I haven't had a chance to go evaluate them.
I as 14 not saying they're wrong, nor am I saying they are right.
I 15 would like to take a little time, and it may be by the next 16 meeting I would be prepared to vote on specific numbers.
17 Ihe concept gives me no problem; it's the numbers that I 18 would like to check.
19 MR. MORRIS:
I discussedthis vith Tom during the 20 break.
In the programmatic environmental impact statement, 21 the activity that they estimate would be produced by the SDS 22 is very close to what Tom says, with minor modifications.
23 And I maybe could read.these'.out.
And it seems to me that 24 if those two agree that much, then I think that those 25 numbers would be reasonable.
ALDERSoN REPoRTthG COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE. S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2346
70 1
Ihey said that the activity released from the SDS 2
would be 3697 curies of tritium, and he has 3000.
And 3
cesium-137,.215.
And Tom has
.2.
And cesium --
4 ER. COCHRAN:
That's 137, I think.
5 MR. MORRIS:
S o rr y.
137,.215.
6 MR. COCHRANs I have
.S.
7 ER. 50RRIS:
And cesium 13u,
.37.
So they are 8
close.
These are all just approximations anyway, and nobody 9
knows exactly how much is going to be in there.
But they're 10 very close to the figures that he has come up with.
11 MR. COCHRANs But this is quite specifica "should 12 not be allowed to exceed."
13 ER. MORRISs Yes.
14 ER. COCHRANs Well, I would also, on the basis of
^
15 discussions I had during the break, make two changes.
One 16 is we can simply delete the tritium number, since you really 17 have no control over the tritium.
And we know they're 18 # comewhere in the neighborhood of 3-4000.
19 Secondly, if some English scholar can come up with 20 some different wording, I would be happy to change that.
21 Instead of a "should not be allowed" to something like "the 22 goal of the" -- you know, "It's our recommendation that 23 these numbers be the goal that one is striving forzandtone 24 should try to get as far below those numbers as possible."
25 I mean I don't need to make it an absolute, an ALOERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. tNC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. 0.C. 20024 (202) $54-2345
71 1
absolute number.
If you are somewhere in the range of these 2
numbers for strontium and cesium, then the tritium is 3
controlling at least in the terms of the whole-body dosage.
4 I have -- whether it's water release or atmospheric release, 5
and I haven't completed the bone-dose effects also, which 6
ought to be examined.
7 ER. PALLADIdos Mr. Chairman, I still f eel that I 8
don 't have an understanding of where these numbers come 9
from.
I still don't have any feel for what they mean.
10 I would like to move that we delay, at least until 11 the next meeting, picking the specific numbers.
12 MR. COCHRAN I have no problem with that.
13 ER. HINNICHs Excuse me.
Could I ask the panel to 14 giv e some thought to Tom's suggestion that we, perhaps with 15 some rephrasing of that, it would still meet the goal he is is trying to obtain, if the panel is in accord,'so that it 17 isn 't -- the feel I get, Tom, is that you don't want to be 1
j 18 so ironcisi that nothing can ha ppen but you want some kind 19 of restriction but properly phrased?
20 NR. COCHRANs That is correct.
21 MR. 50RRIS:
May I?
1 22 NR. MINNICH Yes.
23 MR. MORRIS:
We took the commission motion on the 24 SDS system tonight, saying that we agree with that and we 1
25 shonid move on with it, you know, provided the NRC approves I
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
72 1
that equipsent.
2 Nor, I would assume that the NRC is oging to 3
approve tha t equipment based on what they feel the levels of 4
treatment that can be obtained.
Are we not duplicating or 5
going at cross-purposes now by putting a futher limit on 6
what the NRC feels can be obtained?
I guess I have a 7
difficult time understanding why we are now making another 8
motion on this.
I as not against it.
I don 't understand 9
why we 're doing it.
10 MR. COCHRAN:
Well, suppose the SDS system doesn't 11 work as some had suggested.
There are alternatives.
One is 12 you can go back and polish the water with EPICOR-2.
~
13 Secondly, you could bring in another system to work on some 14 of the water, which would probably not be the desirable 15 alternative.
16 So I think it's not enough just to say we think 17 you ought to crank up the SDS system and that takes care of 18 our concerns in terms of decontamination.
I think we need 19 to leave some sense of what we think is an adequate cleanup 20 job.
And my sense of that is it's right around what they 21 say they can do.
And if they do what they say they can do, 22 then these other isoptopes are probably not the controlling 23 isotopes.
Tritium is probably the controlling one.
And at 24 that p o in t., it doesn't make sense to reduce the strontium 25 and cesium levels a whole lot more if you're only reducing ALDEASoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASH 4NGToN. D.C. 20024 G02) 554 2345
73 1
the health ef fects by a percentage point or two or 2
whatever.
3 HR. MORRIS:
I understand wha t you're saying.
4 MR. MINNICH:
Okay.
Let's see.
Someone moved 5
that we delay it?
6 MR. PALLADINO:
Delay picking the exact number.
7 NR. MINNICH4 Hight.
8 And do you want to second that, Tom?
9 MR. COCHRAN:
Well, I will second that, if the 10 motion is now that we agree to this recommendation in 11 principle and delay until our next meeting the selection of 12 precise numbers and the precise wording of the 13 recommendation.
14 MR. MINNICHs Okay, properly moved and seconded.
15 All those in favor of the motion, indicate such by saying 16 "Aye."
17 (Chorus of ayes.)
18 MR. MINNICH:
Any opposed?
I l
19 (No response.)
20 ER. MINNICH4 Hearing none, the ayes have it, the 21 motion is carried.
22 Bill, I was just looking through my date book, and 23 I referred to two other meetings.
We only have one other 24 meeting scheduled, don't we?
25 VOICES:
Two.
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W. WASHINGTCN. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
14 1
MR. MINNICH:
Two?
What is it?
2 ER. TBAVERS There are two other meetings.
3 ER. MINNICH4 The 19th --
4 MR. TRAVERS:
The 11th and the 19th.
5 MR. MINNICH:
Oh, the 11th.
Okay.
Thank you.
I 6
missed marking down the 11th.
I better get that in right 7
now.
And they're bo th here; is tha t correct?
8 ER. TRAVERSt That's right.
9 MB. MINNICHs The 11th and the 18th or the 19th?
10 P.R. PALLADINO:
19th.
It MR. MINNICHs 19th.
Okay.
12 Okay, are there any other issues to be discussed 13 or that the panel cares to discuss concerning water?
14 MR. WAGNERs This is not concerning water -- not 15 concerning water.
16 ER. MINNICH:
Well, let's try to finish up the 17 water so we can put that behind us and then move on.
18 Any other discussion on water?
Excuse me.
Go 19 ahead.
20 ER. PALLADINot There are other things mentioned 21 in the report here with regard to water.
I gather we're not 22 taking action on those other items?
23 MR. COCHRAN Well, don't be so sure.
24 MR. PALLADINO:
Well, you're leaving the water; 25 tha t's why I as asking.
ALCERSON REPORTING CCMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W, WASNINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
75 1
MR. MINNICH4 Yes, you know, the important thing 2
was to give me commething to go back to the NBC, which I 3
will do as soon as I get the transcript.
I will take the 4
motions and put them into a manner that you have suggested 5
here, Tom.
And I will see that all of you get copies of 6
what I send to Mr. Ahearne.
Or do you want to see it before 7
I send it down?
8 MR. COCHRANs I think you could -- I would have no 9
problem with you sending a draf t, but I think we're going to 10 have another meeting and decide on the final wording.
11 Certainly, we haven't completed this last recommendation 12 yet.
13 MR. MINNICHs Well, we have to bear in mind one 14 things from my part in getting this, you know, with my 15 other duties, et cetera, I will be pressed to get it down 18 there by the end of the month, which is the deadline.
So I 17 don't want to delay it too awfully long.
18 MB. CDCHRAN:
Well, we're meeting on the 11th.
19 HR. MINNICH:
I know, but I've got to take and put 20 it into the form and get it down there.
And, believe me, I 21 have other duties, Tom.
I as sorry.
~
22 MR. COCHRANs Let me get this straight.
- Now, 23 you're going to write a draft, which is the major part of 24 that work, end we're simply going to look -- or somebody is we're simply going to be looking 25 going to write a draft ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON O.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
76 1
at it and making very minor adjustments on the 11th.
I 2
wouldn't think that 3
MR. MINNICH I am not sure -- what I am saying to 4
you is I am not sure I am going to have that draft for you 5
on the 11th.
6 MR. MORRIS:
Jack, I hate to ask to do this, but 7
can somebody f rom the NBC staff, can't some staff support 8
assist with putting that draft together, since it's just a 9
matter of record now?
10 MR. MINNICH:
Can you do that?
That would help 11 me, because that's where I was having a problem.
Okay.
If 12 you can do that, if they could have that for us on the 11th, 13 it's just a matter of taking it out of the transcript.
14 Okay.
Good.
Fine.
15 MR. WAGNER Now, I know the hour is getting late, 16 and I as a little hesitant to bring up the subject, but I 17 think it 's important, and it has to do, again, with the l
18 issue of getting the radioactivity off of Three Mile I
19 Island.
It has to do with tne EPICORE-2 spent resins.
i 20 I refer you to a letter that we were sent, to Mr.
f 21 Dieckamp, p resident of GPU, from Mr. Ahearne on January l
22 12th.
And there is a particular part in here that I would 23 like to cite initially and then make a recommendation.
l 24 He says:
"With regard to Item 5, we are concerned 25 about the lack of progress that has been made to comply with I
i ALDERSoN REPORTING COWANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE. S.W. WASHINGTCN. O C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
~
77 1
the Commission's order of October 16,.
1979, requiring 2
solidification of EPICORE-2 spent resins.
Over 12 months 3
later, we have not received the plan for compliance with the 4
Commission's order for even the low-level activity second-5 and third-stage liners.
- 4e have technical concerns about 6
potential problems with the near-term stability of some of 7
the resins and the integrity of some of the liners.
8 "Therefore, there should be no further delay 9
c'tha-in the development of definitive plans to solidify to the EPICORE-2 spent resins or proposals for alternative 11 methods to stabilize these vastes."
12 art then the next sentence is one that I want to 13 emphasize particularly:
"This could include a request to be 14 relieved of the requirement for solidification."
15 He then goes on:
"You are requested to submit 16 such plans or proposed alternative methods including a 17 coazitsent to the schedule, identif ying major milestones, 18 within six weeks of this letter."
19 Now, rece n tl y, I had the opportunity to look at 20 these storage cells for solid wastes that they have at TMI.
21 And it seems to me that again we have an example of 22 something that we want to get off Three Mile Island as soon 23 as possible.
..s>..
These resins are sand-like and are not in a fixed 24 25 form.
It is my understanding that at the present time it is.
ALDER $oN REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024(202) 554 1345
78 1
permissible to ship resins, material of that type.
But 2
after July 1st, it will no longer be permissible.
3 And I think tha t because of the special problems 4
associated with TMI, that those resins, I think we should 5
consider 'M e possibiltity of making a recommendation that 6
those resins should he shipped off without solidification, 7
the low-level waste, the low-level, to a commercial storage 8
site and the high-level to a DOE site.
9 And I think it should be done before July 1st.
10 There is a specific prohibition of this on the part of the 11 NRC.
But in my judgment, the dancers associated with these 12 resins being shipped is less than the dangers associated 13 with keeping thes there for long-term storrage.
14 And I can't visualize how th e y would be 15 solidified, anyway.
They're in steel tanks.
And I think 16 the dangers associated with soif fication of those resins 17 on site at Three Mile Islan c
.a far greater than very, very 18 careful transportation off Three Mile Island.
19 MR. COCHRAN.
DOE won't take the high-level.
20 MR. WAGNERs Well, the comment was made by Dr.
21 Cochran that DOE won't take the high-level.
But I think 22 throughout all the discussions between NRC and DOE, we see Z3 the situation that they might take if they were given 24 adequate instructions by the either Congress or the 25 President.
ALDER $CN REPcRTING COMPANY,lNC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE $,W, WA*HINGICN, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
79 1
5R. MINNICHs Yes.
And that kind of goes down to 2
a congressional mandate or whatever.
And that appears to be 3
a problem.
4 MB. PALLADINO:
M r. Chairman, I think we are in a 5
" Catch-22" in this situation.
We ought to get out of it.
6 And I agree with Henry that we ought to get some pressure on 7
DOE to accept them and get agreement between the two on how 8
the y should be shipped.
I as a little concerned tha t 9
solidification gives you more problems and gives you added to risks, at least to the workers if not to the general 11 public.
I would like to see them get off the Island just as b
12 soon as possible, as quick as we can.
13 Now, ! think it would be appropriate to d ra f t a 14 recommendation to that effect.
15 3R. COCHRAN What is your sense of the additional 16 worker exposure associated with solidifying them on the 17
!sland as opposed to off the Island?
f 18 MR. PALLADINO:
Well, my problem is that the 19 Island, it's sort of an ad hoc situation no matter how you 20 do it, whereas when they're brought somewhere else I presume 21 they have better facilities and equipment.
22 5R. COCHRAN:
Does the NRC have a number f or 23 verker exposure on solidifying the resins; Bernie?
24 MR. BARRETTs I am Lake Barrett.
I am the deputy 25 director of Three 511e Island Program Of fice.
I don't l
ALOERSCN PEPCRTING COMPANY,INC, 1
I 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W, WASHINGTON, O C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
80 1
remember the exact numbers.
But there were some estimates 2
made back earlier.
It was a few man-rems.
I don't believe 3
-- it certsinly wasn't 100.
". t was a few, maybe ten, 4
somewhere in that neighborhood.
5 MR. COCHRANs What about from 6
MR. ARNCLD:
My recollection is consistent with 7
Lake's on the NBC's estimate and the number of man-ress 8
associated with solidification.
And I think that was the 9
judgment we initially made also.
I think that we have come to to understand better what would be involv,ed in solidifying 11 the first-stage liners, in particular, but we might not be 12 quite that optimistic on total man-rem.
And I certainly 13 would agree with Dr. Palladino that the opportunity f or 14 increased worker exposure is tremendously higher with 15 on-site solidifiestion than it will be for shipping those 16 resins, which was the company's original intent.
17 MR. MINNICH:
Go ahead.
18 HR. REIDs So, really, what you're saying, this is 19 something that should be handled or should have been handled 20
" yesterday," so to speak, if you're going to meet that 21 deadline by July 1st.
But, again, if we don't do something, 22 then we're going back to what M rs. Trunk said about storage 23 site.
24 MR. WAGMER:
Can I clarify one thing?
For 25 reactors, in general, the solidification requirement will ALCERSoN REPORTING CoWPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
81 1
not go into effect until July 1st.
There is a specific 2
requirement at the present time of the NRC with respect to 3
the EPICORE-2 resins that they solidify.
4 But in this letter, the v, I interpret it, this 5
is a statement that says this could include a request, the 6
NRC is saying.to Net Ed --
l 7
MR. PALLADINO:
What's the date of that letter?
8 NR. WAGNERa January 12, 1981.
9 NR. PALLADINO:
From whom to whom?
10 NR. WAGNER:
From Chairman Ahearne to the 11 president of GPU, Mr. Dieckamp.
12 They're saying that the Net Ed has not met that 13 requirement for solidification, and they said that they want 14 a plan and the plan could include a request to be relieved 15 of the requirement for solidification.
t 16' What I recommend for our consideration is that we 17 recommmend that the solidification requirement with respect 18 to the EPICORE-2 spent resins be valved by the NRC in~ order 19 that tho se resins can be taken off.the Island as soon as 20 possible, because the delays on the one hand, the dangers 21 both to the public and to the workers in the solidification a
22 process sees to me to outweigh the dangers that would be H
23 associated with very careful shipment.
24 MR. COCHRAN:
How is the public endangered by 25 solidification on site?
l ALCERSoN REPORTING CCMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W. WASHINGTON O.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
[
82 1
MR. WAGNET,
Well, if you visit Three Elle Island 2
and you see these storage tanks with these carbon steel 3
containers that contain the resins, and you look 50 feet 4
away and you see the Susquehanna River, your immediate 5
reaction is why don't we get those things off the Island 6
ins tead of putting in a solidification process going on 50 7
feet from the river?
Or maybe not 50 feet; it's an 8
exaqqeration.
But I can look and see the river right there, 9
and here are these storage tankr. and I can't see how you 10 would go solidifying th e resins without taking the resins 11 out of the carbon steel tanks and solidifying them.
12 MR. CDCHRAN:
Are these the ones they have on the 13 concrete cells?
14 MR. WAGNER:
Yes, these are the ones that are in 15 the concrete cells.
They're 70 concrete storage cells.
And te I would think that they could be shipped off the Island 17 immediately.
18 MR. REID:
So in other words, in a solid state 19 rather than --
20 HR. WAGNER:
They 're in solid sta te, but they're 21 in a sand-like solid state rather than in a fixed-form solid 22 state.
23 HR. REID:
Well, could we ask NRC to allow us 24 to allow 3et Ed to ship them?
25 MR. MINNICH:
If it's the consensus of the panel, ALOER$oN REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIAG!NIA AVE, S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
83 1
I see no reason why we can't.
2 HR. REIDs All right.
I then sake that notion 3
that we contact the NBC and ask that GPU or Metcopolitan --
4 will GPU be allowed to ship the resins in the state that 5
they're in now; solid state, then so be it.
6 MR. MINNICH4 I think they would have to take 7
special -- we would have to make a proviso that they would 8
have to make very special precautious in the transportation 9
of these.
10 ER. REID Well, I am quite sure they will do it this.
12
- 52. WAGNER:
Well, I think that's part of the 13 problem, though.
Ihis-letter is dated January 12th.
Ther 14 were asked to submit a plan within six weeks, which we are 15 already about midway.
And I just wonder whether we could 16 find out where the submission of that plan stands so that we 17 know whether they're going to ask to ship istedia tely, how 18 they're going to ship, so that we could take an action on l
19 their proposed plan, maybe.
20 ER. REIDs We, obviously, are very much aware of 21 the letter, and we've a number of conversations, 22 especially that turn on tha t.
We haven't sade a final i
23 decision on that, but indications are, yes, we will take 24 advantage of that invitation to request a valver.
25 I guess I should point out that there are other l
l ALDER $oM PEPCRTING CoWPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINtA AVL S.W. WASHthGToN. 0.C. 20024 (2C21854-2345
84 1
things that the NRC perhaps has in mind other than shipping 2
the water, which of course,is a possibility.
But one of the 3
things tha't is permitted in the NRC directive that imposes 4
the requirement for -- well, what this directive does, if 5
you*re referring to it, it says you can't ship -- you cannot 6
dispose of dewatered resins in the devatered state af ter 7
July 1st.
But they give the option of -- they give two 8
options:
solidification or what are called "high-integrity 9
containers."
And so that's a possibility also.
10
- 53. MINNICH:
It's not that I am against taking 11 action on moving that vaste as quickly as possible, but I 12 just like to have the benefit of what the plan is going to 13 Ebe and act on the plan, of that would be forthcoming.
14 Because we're going to have two meetings.
15 Would we be able to get your recommendation by the 18 third meeting we're going to have in February, which is, 17 what, the 19th?
18 MR. COCHRAN:
The 19th.
59 MR. MINNICHs So that we could act Cn that at that 20 particular time?
21 ER. REIDs Yes.
22 MR. MINNICH:
Maybe that's not quick enough for 23 them.
24 MR. COCHRAN:
If we cannot see anything by that 25 time, then by delaying it we're just moving closer and AtrERSCN REPCRTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W. WASHINGTCN. O.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
95 1
closer to that July 1st.
2 ER. BINNICRs I agree.
I think, th o ugh, that NRC 3
isn 't going to do very such until Het Ed at least outlines 4
some kind of plan.
And it would be helpful, I think, if we 5
either support that plan or oppose it.
And if we could get 6
something by the 19th and then act on the 19th to go with 7
all our other recossendations 8
HR. REIDs All right.
If they have nothing by the 9
19th, then we can make that action?
to ER. BINNICHa Tha t's fine.
11 5H. 50ERIS:
All right.
Would you put that down 12 somewhere so that it'll be in there?
13 5H. REID:
Mr. Chairman, I have no objection to 14 reviewing the plan, but I am not sure we want to get bogged 15 down in reviewing individual plans.
I don't mind having it 18 and giving whatever feeling I have about it, but that 17 doesn't constitute an assessment of adequacy, I don't think 18 we want to start to do NRC's work.
I have no objection, 19 though, to --
20 3R. EIN3ICH I agree with you.
I think that a 21 real problea here is that it appears that we are, in effect, 22 making the site a storage site, which is what we are totally 23 opposed to.
And I think that is what we are trying to 24 address.
25 Did you have something to say?
ALDEASoN REPORTING CoWPANY,INC, 400 VIAGINIA AVE. S.W. WASHINGTON, D C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
86 1
MR. HOVEY4 I was only going to point out that one 2
has to remember when you make recommendations like this one, 3
yes, it is true, you can ship the watered and dispose of 4
dewatered resins until July 1st, but you have to ship them 5
well, only in shipping casks, and there is only a limited 6
supply of those.
So physically doing it, even if we got the 7
go-ahead tomorrow, we would probably be limited just by the 8
nonavailability of sufficient shipping casks.
In other 9
words, you couldn't do it by July 1st.
10 MR. COCHRAN:
Isn 't it limited by a lack of a 11 place to put them at the other end?
12 MR. HOVEY:
Well, that certainly is a problem, 13 too, Dr. Cochran, in terms of the high-level liners, EPICORE 14 liners, particularly.
You are aware of the problems there.
15 We questioned whether the available shallow-land disposal 16 sites -- let's put it this way:
there is a lot of issues we 17 think that need to be addressed before one -- one can say 18 that you put the high-level liners in the shallow liner 19 disposal site.
The shallow-liner disposal site and the 20 State involved would have to agree.
21 MR. MINNICHa Would someone refresh my memory?
Didn't one of the discussions we had when Dr. Cunningham was 22 23 here, wasn't there a concern expressedaabout what might happen to these resins, that there might be a problem 24 25 developing with them?
l l
ALDERSoN REPCRTING CoWPANY. INC.
i 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
[
87 1
MB. WILLIAMSON4 Mr. Chairman, my memory indicates 2
that he indicated that DOE would be interest <4 or willing or 3
had the authority to accept some of this material on an RCD 4
basis.
I don 't believe he further identified that in terms 5
of quantity.
6 MR. WAGNER:
I think tha t 's righ t.
And I think 7
the permanent solidification of those resins, such as using 8
vitrification, would certainly be a legitimate area of 9
research for the DOE to do.
And there are not that many 10 resins, high-level resins, resin containers, that ther 17 couldn't take all of them, it seems to me.
I am speaking 12 about the high-level now, not the low-level.
13 MR. COCHRANs Could we get a better reading on the 14 numbers of high versus clearly low versus questionable 15 resins?
16 MR. HOVEY:
It just so happens that they rarely 17 distinctly divide themselves into high-level and low-level.
18 There are about 51 of the prefilters, and they are what we 19 think would be classified as the high-level resins.
And 20 about 20 of the second-and third-stages, which are in the 21 category of being very much like resins that come from an 22 operating reactor.
And we don't feel that they would be a 23 disposal probles.
Again, with th'ose, you would have the 24 cask problem also, although probably not at this time a l
l shallow-land disposal site acceptability problem.
i 25 l
ALDERSoN REPCATING COMPANY. !NC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W, WASHINGToH, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
88 1
MR. COCHRANs But DOE is not at this point 2
disposed to taking 51 high-level resins?
3 MR. WAGNER:
Why not?
I mean why can't they have 4
done something th e re.
It seems to me if you're going to try 5
different means, vitrification, it would be an asset to them 6
to be able to deal with it.
7 (laughter.)
8 MR. MORRIS:
Mr. Chairman, could I,-- what is the 9
purpose of the next meetings?
I don't know whether there is 10 a rule here that we have to stay till 10:00 or longer, and I 11 just wonder whether the issue tonight is not going to be 12 water and the issue at the next meeting some other thing.
13 Because there is one thing, I would like to go back to your 14 concern when you opened the mee ting, and that was three 15 sesbers have been removed from the committee by Governor 16 Thornburgh, and tha t bothers me.
And I would kind of like l
1 17 to get into a five-or ten-minute discussion on th a t before l
l 18 the meeting concludes.
19 MR. MINNICHs All right.
May I suggest, then, 20 that we do thiss My intent was -- or I thought this was in 21 keeping with our discussions at the last meeting -- that l
22 this meeting would be for the water, and the next one would 23 be to move into the vaste issue, the resins, et cetera. ~And -
24 I would suggest that we do just that, that we discuss the i
issue of the panel makeup and then conclude for the 25 ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W, WASHINGTON. 0.C. 20024 (202) 554-2346
89 1
evening, so the young ladies can get back to Washington, 2
D.C. tonight.
3 Everybody is in agreement to that?
And we come 4
prepared to the next meeting to discuss the vaste issue, the 5
resins, et cetera, et cetera.
6 ER. REIDs That's very much a concern, and it's 7
going to be a big concern.
8 HR. HINNICH:
Oh, absolutely.
No question.
9 MR. PALLADINO Couldn't have better agreement on 10 that.
11 HR. COCHRANs Are we going to abandon the idea of 12 any sort of what I would label " findings" and just stick to 13 recommendations?
Or are we going to come back to that?
Are 14 we going to go through all the reconsendations on all these 15 issues first and then come back?
Or are we just not going 16 to come back at all?
What is the pleasure of the 17 committee?
If we're going to have findings, it seems to me I
l 18 ve ought to clean up the water issue bef ore we lpa on to some l
19 of these others.
i 20 ER. HINNICHs Well, an example of a finding?
21 MR. COCHRANs Well, some sort of background 22 analysis to justif y the -- to in ef f ect support the 23 recommendation, rather than'just the recommendationosortuof 24 appearing out of the blue in a letter.
l 25 NR. MINNICH: -Well --
l
/
l l
l ALDERSoN REPORT;NG COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGHA AVE., S.W,. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2346
90 1
MR. COCHRANs It sakes for a more interesting 2
report.
3 NR. HINNICH:
Weren't our minutes along with the 4
reconnendations -- wouldn't our minutes really be the 5
background in this instance?
I think further, Tom, you 8
know, I suspect that along the way here Mr. Ahearne is going 7
to be coming to us from time to time and saying, "Will you 8
please" -- as he did wid1 the water issue -
"Will you 9
please address this issue," which will, you know, keep us to hopping, perhaps.
Maybe I as wrong.
I don't know.
I don't we still have 11 know.
We still have one -- don't forget 12 one water issue yet before us for the next meeting, first 13 ites, and get that out of the way so I can get -- you know, 14 we can get the final recommendations to the NRC.
15 MR. WAGNER:
Mr. Chairman.
18 HR. YINNICH Yes.
17
- 58. WAGNER:
It seems to me that there is so much 18 data available that we should limit ourselves to the l
19 recommendation with a concise statement of the reasoning
~
l 20 behind the recommendation, and only put what Tom has referred to as " findings" if we take exception to something 21 22 that is reported, as, for example, in the environmental t
i 23 ispact statement?
l 24 It seems to me, I think, to try to redo the l
findings of the environmental impact statement or Het Ed 25 l
l ALDERSCN R2 PORTING COMP ANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTCN D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345 L
91 1
data or something of that sort would just take us an 2
inordinate amount of time.
And I think that by adequate use 3
of just giving the reomanendations with a statement of why 4
ve are making that recommendation, the essence of why we are i
5 naking that recommendation, I think that would be adequate, 8
particularly since, as you say, the transcripts of the 7
zeeting would all be available to anybody who wants to go 8
into -- who wants to develop an understanding as to how we 9
came to these conclusions.
10 NR. EINNICH Is, in fact, the NRC, such as Mr.
11 Ahearne, getting a copy of our transcripts?
12 MB. COCHRAN:
Ke's ce-tainly not reading them.
13 (Laughter.)
14 NR. WAGNERs I think, Tom, is a good point, 15 though.
That may be true.
And I think we write pages and 18 pages and pages of findings, that maybe that would not get 17 read either.
And I just think we would serve a much better 18 purpose by just giving recommendations and supply all those 19 great minutes to somebody that wants to find why we made 20 those recommendations.
I know that I would like to have 21 less reading material.
I know we ask for it, but it is an 22 awful lot.
23 ER. BINNICHs You're on the sailing list.
Not the I
24 panel sailing list, but the other one.
25 HR. WAGNER:
Yes.
There's an awful lot.
I ALDERSoN REPORTING COMP ANY, LNC, 400 WAGINLA AVL 3.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2045
92 1
MB. MINNICH:
I wish I had the paper concession.
2 MR. PALLADIN0s As a matter of fact, I support the 3
recommendation of both these gentlemen.
As a matter of 4
f act, I had [sre trouble with the findings than I did with 4
5 the recommendations.
6 ER. EINNICH:
Okay.
7 (Laughter.)
8
- 53. COCHBAN:
That's fine with me.
9 MR. MORRIS:
Can I make a comment on the fact that to I really as concerned tha t the State and our great Governo r 11
-- who is politically oriented the same way as I am and I 12 hate to disagree with him -- but I really do feel that he 13 should have somebody on
- is committee who is in a position 14 of giving us some idea as to the State policy.
I see it as 15 somewhat of a little bit of a cop-out to remove anybody from 18 the committee that would give us an indication of how the 17 Sta te f eels.
I think they ove it to us to give us that kind f
i le of feeling.
So even if it would only be one of three, or i
19 maybe none of the three that were on, but some 20 represea.tative f rom the State that would actively 21 participate and vote.
I would like to see that happen.
22 HR. MINNICH4 I sort of feel he deserted us.
j
[
l 23 HR. HORSISa Yes.
I think maybe it's a hot l
24 potato.
1 25
- 53. EINNICH4 No offense, gentlemen, but l
l ALCEASoN REPORT;NG COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE.,3.W WASHWGToN, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 *4146
93 1
MR. PALLADIN0s Mr. Chairman, could you approach 2
the Governor and see if his sind might not be changed?
I 3
think it's a shame for us not to ha ve the input from individuals such as Iom Gerusky and Dr. Tokuhata and Mr.
4 i
5 Williamson.
I think they have a lot that could help us in 6
our work.
7 ER. CCCHRANs I agree.
8 5R. 3IN'JICH:
Yes, in fact I made a note to do 9
just that.
So I am with you on that.
Okay.
10
- 58. PALLADINO:
Excuse me.
May I adds if the 11 Governor cannot be convinced that individuals of this 12 caliber from the Governor's office, if he cannot be 13 convinced that they should be on there, then I would add 14 both that we can get into these roles of people': competence 15 and replace them in kind.
I think we should have somebody 16 from Health and somebody from Environmental or Health 17 Physics activities and f rom Defense.
18 MR. MINNICH:
Okay.
The meeting is adjourned.
19 Thank you.
I appreciate the panel's willingness e
20 to take some positions tonight.
(
21 (Whereupon, at 10:50 p.s.,
the meeting was 22 adjourned.)
23 2
24 25 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. tNC.
400 VIRGMA AVE. S.W., WASHINGTON. 0.C. 20C24 (202) 554-2345
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COW 4ISSION
...3
.3 4.
.j. " a.. ". =. s.. a c ".. a.
,. r - - a. a. s. 4. 2 '. a..r..- a.
. ". a.
.w
. 3 - -
w4 4
3
'..S the matter O f:
?!eeting of the Advisory Panel for the Decontamination of Three Ilile Island 2 February 4, 1981
'a.a.
^#
- ., s-a. n. d..d....
3 t.
Oc0ke Nuci:e r :
Harrisburg, Pa.
c '..= c a.
- . C m. a. r..e.. 3
.. =.. 4 w. 4...
.4
.4
. g..a..=.
w
=..-..e
.=.e. A.
..w. G.. a..d.e 4Q
-3
- p.e n.
.. a. ' d
=..e W a..r a. d...
..yC
.p d.
..= 4.... 3
- 4. +m.e..
. e. a. g 3...#
.?
.Wg
- 4.. s.
w
=..w. a.
e Diane Hammond e s.r t a.:.
.% a.,. C.. a
.l. a. s. s) r
..,y C
wa..w.=.
.=.a,.. _.. e e..., g.
=... a..l 4
s
,. w.
a 1
I h
1
D10tribution fcr Tranneripts fcr Advicory~Pcna1 Me2 ting')
2/4/81 Meeting Harrisburg, PA.
Chairman Ahearne
- 1014-H Mr. Peter Tuite Cocruissioner Gilinsky Waste Management Group, Inc.
Comissioner Bradford 503 Crasslands Road Comissioner Hendrie Valhalla, New York 10595 W. Dircks, EDO 6209-MNBB H. Denton, N10t P-428 Dr. Tom Gerusky B. Snyder Bureau of Radiation Protection L. Barrett (20)
Dept. of Environmental Resources OGC 1035-H Box 2063 ELD 9604-MNBB Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120 TMIPO Lynch Dr. James Opelka
-ANL POUm Leech EISD/ Bldg 10 Weller Argonne National Laboratory Travers Argonne, Illinois 60439 Lo Duncan D. Cleary P-522 p
g C. Hickey P-234 W. Pasciak P-712 F. Congel P-712 E. Hanrahan 1013-H M. Libarkin, ACRS 1014-H Rich Major, ACRS 1014-H Jeanne Cook, OPA 3709-MNBB R. Browning, NMSS 905-SS Docket File NRC PDR N
g Local PDR
-TFiA 8 d[b -1, C N}
9 LA L
, s vte 121931* -d Steven M. Long, Director i
, p. g toss ~j Power Plant Siting Program
\\gj c W 55
- /
M@
Department of Natural Resources Tawes Building B-3 Annapolis, Maryland 21401 s
Herbert Feinroth Dept of Energy ET-763 GTN B-107 Mr. Matthew Bills Environmental Protection Agency 401 M Street, S. W.
Washington, D. C.
20460 Mr. J. Shea Council on Environmental Quality 722 Jackson Place, N.W.
Washington, D. C.
20006
,