ML20030E058
| ML20030E058 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 09/15/1981 |
| From: | Branagan E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20030E021 | List: |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8109170360 | |
| Download: ML20030E058 (7) | |
Text
_ _
9/15/81 4
UNITED STATES OF AMERIO I4UCLEAR REGULATORY C0: MISSION BEFORE THE ATONIC SAFETY Af40 LICEriS!HG BOARD In the flotter of
)
PElidSYLVANIA POWER & LIGHT CUMPAliY Docket ilos. 50-387 0.L.
ALLEGHEiiY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC.
)
50-388 0.L.
(Susqt.2hanna Steam Electric Station, i
Units 1 and 2)
)
TESTIMO..Y OF EDWARD F. BRANAGAN, JR.
RELATING TO RISKS OF LOW-LEVEL RADIATION IN LIQUID EFFLUENTS (Contention 2)
Q.
By whom are you employed and what work do you perform?
1 A.
I am employed by the U.S. fiuclear Regulatory Commission as a Radiological Physicist in the Division of Systens Integration, Office of fiuclear Reactor Regulttion.
A copy of my statement of professional qualifications is attached.
d y.
Have you read Contention 2?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Describe the scope of your testimony.
A.
Contention 2 addresses:
(1) the residual risks of low level radiation which will result from the release of radionuclides from 8109170360 810915 PDR ACDCK 05000387 cT PDR
?, the facility into the Susquehanna River and (2) the health effects of chlorine to be discharged into the river.
I will respond to the first part of Contention 2.
My testimony will address the amount of radionuclides to be released to the river, the potential doses the public r.ay receive frcm those releases, and the possible risks to the public health from these doses.
Q.
Has the Staff calculated the amount of ' radioactive materials in liquid effluents to be released from the Susquehanna facility?
A.
Yes.
The radioactive effluent releases calculated for the facility are listed in Table 4.11 (p. 4-20) of the FES.
Q.
Has the Staff calculated doses to the public resulting from the radioactive material in the liquid effluents?
A.
Yes. Tne radioactive ef'luent releases in Table 4.11 (p. 4-20) and the hydrological transport and dispersion factors in Table 4.12 (p.
4-20) of the FES were used to estimate doses to both a hypothetical maximally exposed individual, the population within 80 km of the plant, and the general U.S. population.
These dose estimates are presented in Tabie 4.8 (p. 4-18) and Table 4.10 (p. 4-19) of the FES.
Q.
-How did the Staff calculate the risks to the public health from low-level radiation coses?
a
. A.
Using the dose estimates in Tables 4.3 and 4.10, the Staff estimated the risk of potential premature death fran cancer among t1e exposed population and the risk of genetic disorders 1.n future generations of the exposed population. The risk estiaators used by the Staff in its calculations are derived from the reconmendat'u6s of the National Academy of Sciences Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation Committee (BEIR I Report ) and the " Final Generic
~
Environmental Statement on the Use of Recycle Plutonium in Mixed Oxide Fuel in Light-Water-Cooled Reactors" (HUREG-0002).
The risk esticators used were:
13S potential deaths from cancer per million person-rem and 258 potential cases of all forms of genetic disorders per million persons-rem.
(The range of values for risk estimators is discussed en page 4-24 of the FES.) By multiplying tnese risk estimators by the estimated annual doses, the Staff estiaated the risks to (1) the maximally exposed individual, (2) the average individual within 80 km of the plant, and (3) the U.S. general population.
y.
What were the Staff estimates of the risks to offsite individuals from exposure to radioactive effluents?
A.
The Staff estimated that the risk of potential premature death from cancer to the maximum exposed individual to radioactive effluents (liquid or gaseous effluents) from one year of reactor operations is less than one chance in one million (i.e., about 7 x
i
~ 10~7 for exposure to gaseous effluents and about 4 x 10-7 for exposure to liquid effluents).
Q.
What were t:
<t.ff estimates of the risks to individuals within 80 km of the p' ant?
A.
The Staff estimated that the risk of potential premature death from cancer to the average exposed individual within 80 km of the facility from exposure to radioactive effluents (both liquid and gaseous) T.om one year of reactor operations is less than one percent of the risk to the maximum exposed individual, y.
What ws:re the Staff estimates of the risks to the t!.S. general public?
A.
The Staff estimated that 0.009 cancer deaths t.y occur in the exposed population and 0.02 genetic disorders may occur in all future generations of the exposed population. These estimates were l
derived by multiplying the annual U.S. general public population dose from exposure to radioactive effluents and transportation of l
fuel and waste from the op ' ration of the Susquehanna facility (65 person-rem) by the risk estimators noted above.
l l
The probability of one cancer death over the lifetimes of the U.S.-
i general pop J1ation due to exposure to radicactive effluents and transportation of fuel and waste frca normai annual operat'on of the m
w
. facility is less than one chance in 100. The probability of one genetic disoroer in future generations of the U.S. general public due to exposure to radioactive effluents and transportation of fuel and-waste from normal annual operation of the facility is less than one chance in 50.
y.
What has the Staff concluded with respect to the risks to the maximally exposed individual, the averase individual within 80 km of the plant, and the general U.S. population?
A.
With regard to exposure of individuals, the Staff stated ir. the FES:
Since the risk from exposure to gaseous or liquid radioactive effluents from nuclear power plants is so low compared with many other types of risk (radiation-related or othenvise), and since the radiation-related risks are based on conservative assumptions, the staff considers the risk to real individuals from exposure to radioactive effluents from normal operations at the Susquehanna Station, Units 1 and 2, to be insignificant.
FES, p. 4-26.
With regard to exposure of the U.S. population, the Staff stated that "the risk to the public health and safety from exposure to radioactive effluents and tne transportation of fuel and wastes from normal operation of Susquehanna Station, Units 1 and 2, will not be significant." FES, p. 4-23.
y.
Were the risks from exposure to cesium-137 and cobalt-60 releases into the Susquehanna River assessed?
G
-_.._____---_____,.,__----__,---__.__-_.--,----------_-_-.---._-_-_---__-____.--____---__-.----___----_.--,-._.___.,___a.-__.
. i A.
Yes.
Estimated quantities of cesium-137 and cobalt-60 are given. in r
Table 4.11 in the FES.
Releases of those radionuclides were taken into account in estimating doses and risks to the nuximally exposed individual and to the general population.
i Q.
How were these conclusicns relating to risks from low-level radiation factored into the cost-benefit analysis for the Susquehanna facility?
~
A.
The environmental costs from radioactive releases into the Susquehanna River are addressed in Section 9.5 of the CES.
The Staf f nas concluded that the dose commitment will have no discernable effect on the population.
i
(
)
f I
x
Professional Qualifications My name is Edward F. Branagan, Jr.
Radiological Assessment Branch in the Of ficeRadio' logical Physicis t w
~
I am a impacts from nuclear power reactorsPresently, I am re nvironmental radiological evaluatin In particular, I am responsible for licensing.g radioecological models and health effect mod I have been with the Radiological Assessment Branch yea rs.
or about 2 Science Teaching from Catholic University in 19 n 1969, an M. A. in
- Biophysics f om Kansas University in 1976
, and a Ph.D. in Radiation for my Ph.D., I was an instructor of Radiation Te hWhile completing College.
ported by a U.S. Public Health Service tranineesh entitled " Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy of GMy disse ge and was sup-Bases."
amma-Irradisted DNA Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS), and wit e Office of Nuclear Regulation (NRR).
I was the project man.ger for two centracts tha work.
Ridge National laboratory.
cal radiation doses from radon-222 and radium-225 relThese contracts ad with Cak Uranium Millingpart of my work on NRC's Draft Generic Environm es.
U;on publication (of the DGEIS, I presented a papDGE act Statement on Uranium Mining and Milling for Commercial Nuclear Poer entitled " He a
ngs.
Heaitti Implications of New Energy Technologies wer" at a Conference on worked on several projects:
Since joining NRR, I have (1) managed and main author of a re,nort e rtitled (NUREG-0558), (2) served as a technical contact e Vyhl Ntclear Power Plant'"
National Laboratory involving development of a c an NRC contract with Argonne health effects from radiation, (3) served as a te h iomputer program t contract with Idaho National Engineering Laboratory involvic n cal m measured concentrations of radionuclides in the e ng estimated and technical monitor on an NRC contract with Lawre nvironment nce Livermore; Laborstory con-(
cerni tra:isport modelsng a literature review of values for parameters in ter Laboratory concer;ning a(5) served as a technical monitor with Dak Rid and ra radionuclide Presently, I au a member of the Health Physics nal ation for the Advancement of Science.
e y and the Ameri,can Associ-G
-,. _ -