ML20054L263
| ML20054L263 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 07/02/1982 |
| From: | Gallo J CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.), ISHAM, LINCOLN & BEALE |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20054L258 | List: |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OLA, NUDOCS 8207070321 | |
| Download: ML20054L263 (15) | |
Text
.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
00cket No. 50-155-OLA CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY
)
(Spent Fuel Pool
)
Modification)
(Big Rock Point Nuclear Power Plant) )
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSION OF LAW ON SUBCONTENTION (3) AND THAT PORTION OF SUBCONTENTION (2) OF CHRISTA-MARIA CONTENTION 9 CONCERNING THE EMERGENCY PLANNING PUBLIC INFORMATION PAMPHLET I.
INTRODUCTION 1.
On June 7 through June 12, 1982, hearings were held in Boyne Falls, Michigan, for the presentation of evidence in the application of Consumers Power Company
(" Licensee") for a license amendment which would allow expanded use of the spent fuel pool at Licensee's Big Rock
\\
Point Nuclear Power Plant located near Charlevoix, Michigan.
l The record was closed on several issues at the conclusion of the hearings, leaving others for consideration at a continued evidentiary session to be held at a future date.
2.
Licensee's proposed license amendment would increase the storage limit of spent fuel assemblies in the l
l spent fuel pool at the Big Rock Point Plant from 193 to 441 l
8207070321 820702 PDR ADDCK 05000155 0
)
i o
assemblies.
Pursuant to a notice published in the Federal 4 Register by the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission on July 23, 1979, several petitions to intervene were filed, and following a prehearing conference, the petitions of Mr. John i
O'Neill, pnd Ms. Christa-Maria, Mr. Jim Mills and Mrs.
Joanne Bier (the latter three individuals w'ere consolidated as one party) were gr, anted by the Atomic Safety and Licensing k" Licensing Dqard") by its order of January,17, Board 1980.
That order also adEitted several contentions raised by these parties as issues in controversy with resp,ect to Licensee's license amendment application to expand the use df the Big
~
Rock Point spent f-01.
i 3.
Christa-Maria Contention 9 prdsented a s
,u
~
' general challenge to Licensee's emergency plan.
- However, 2,
upon completion of discovery and futher. briefing by the parties, the Licensing Board, in its Order of April 20, 1982, limited the inquiry under Christa-Ma'ia Contention 9 N
r r
to nine specific subcontentions,,two of which are considered (s here insofar as they concern the public inforpation pamphlet, s
Specifically, the first sentence-[of ~subcontention (2)1/ and
. '(
.nubcontention-(3), provide:
~
\\
\\
\\
t t
2 s
j 1/
Subcontention (2) also stated that local officials and school officials should be more completely educated in the problems of radiation exposure.
Since that aspect of the' subec'ntention does not concern the public in-formation pimphlet, it is not considered here.
x.
5 J.
r
. (2)
Consumers Power, Company (applicant) should improve its public information pamphlet to more adequately inform people about radiation hazards, particularly to children and pregnant women.
(3)
Applicant's public information pamphlet has not been properly distributed and should therefore be redistributed.
4.
All of the evidence to be presented on the foregoing subcontentions regarding the public information pamphlet was heard.
Since Licensee intends to issue a newly revised pamphlet as soon as these issues are decided by the Licensing Board, the parties' findings of fact and conclusions of law are being filed on an expedited basis.
The Licensing Board, in turn, will promptly issue a partial initial decision on this matter.
II.
FINDINGS OF FACT A.
Adequacy of the Pamphlet as to Radiation Hazards.
S.
Mr. Phillip B.
Loomis, Public Affairs Director at the Big Rock Point plant testified on behalf of Licensee that he was responsible for development of the original public information pamphlet regarding emergency planning which was distributed in early 1981.2/
Mr. Loomis testified 2/
" Testimony of Phillip B.
Loomis with Respect to Certain Subcontentions of Christa-Maria's Contention 9 Regarding Emergency Planning", following transcript page ("Tr.")
1038, (hereinafter "Loomis Testimony"), pp.
2, 3.
The original public information pamphlet was introduced as Consumers Power Company Exhibit No. 4 and appears as to the Loomis Testimony.
. that Licensee intends to distribute a revised pamphlet in the vicinity of the Big Rock Point Plant.1!
The pamphlet Licensee intends to distribute is actually the pamphlet used by Licensee at its Palisades Nuclear Power Plant revised so as to be specifically applicable to the Big Rock Point Plant (hereaf ter referred to as the "New Pamphlet"). A!
6.
Mr. Roger Sinderman, Licensee's Director of Radiological Services and an expert in the area of radiation and radiological health and safety,E! testified he had reviewed the New Pamphlet in its entirety during its develop-ment for use at the Palisades Nuclear Plant and that he had authored the radiation discussion found therein.5!
The radiation discussion in the New Pamphlet, as developed for the Palisades Nuclear Plant, is equally appropriate for use in connection with the Big Rock Point emergency planning activities.1!
7.
Mr. Loomis and Mr. Sinderman both testified that the New Pamphlet would be revised to make it specifically 3/
Loomis Testimony, pp.
4, 6; Tr. 1030-1031, 1138.
4/
Consumers Power Company Exhibit No. 5 and Attachment 1 to the Loomis Testimony; Tr. 1026.
5/
Consumers Power Company Exhibit No. 8; Tr. 1293-1294.
6/
Mr. Sinderman stated that he wrote the radiation discussion as it is found on pages 14 through 22 of the New Pamphlet.
In addition, he wrote or reviewed the material on radiation found in the first 13 pages of the New Pamphlet.
Tr. 1027, 1295.
7/
Tr. 1298.
. applicable to the Big Rock Point Plant.S!
Moreover, Messrs.
Loomis and Sinderman testified that additional information would be included in the New Pamphlet.
The section at page 8 of the New Pamphlet addressing evacuation will contain the following additional sentence:
"Under state and local protective action guidelines, consideration will be given to advising children and pregnant women of early evacuation in view of the greater sensitivity of unborn and young children to radiation."1 This statement is a corollary to the one made at page 17 of the New Pamphlet, namely that " Unborn and very young children are more sensitive to radiation than are older children and adults."1E However, Ms. Christa-Maria, testifying on her behalf, stated that she believed that use of the term " women of childbearing age" rather than " unborn" would better explain to the lay public the increased risk of radiation to unborn children. "11/
Mr. Sinderman initially
-8/
Tr. 1031, 1297.
These include the obvious and necessary changes to account for the dif ferent entities and geography; as well as a correction to the definition of " Maximum Permissible Dose on page 21, namely, the phrase "500 millirem of radiation per day" will be changed to read "500 millirems of radiation per year."
Tr. 1308-09.
In addition, Licensee intends to print its name on the inside front cover and indicate its role in preparation of the pamphlet in cooperation with the local county officials.
Tr. 1034, 1297.
9/
Tr. 1033, 1297-98.
10/
Tr. 1032.
This statement did not appear in the original Fig Rock Point pamphlet, Consumers Power Company Exhibit No.
4.
11/
Tr. 1201-1202.
1
. disagreed with the use of the phrase " women of childbearing age" since women of childbearing age are not more sensitive to radiation than other adults.
Rather, it is the unborn child that is more sensitive to radiation.1 !
After a colloquy between the Licensing Board and Mr. Sinderman, counsel agreed to take the clarifying language suggested by Judge Shon under advisement.12!
On due consideration, Licensee hereby agrees and stipulates that the following sentence appearing on page 17 of the New Pamphlet
" Unborn and very young children are more sensitive to radiation than are older children and adults" - will be changed to read:
Women of childbearing age and women with very young children should be aware of the fact that, as compared with older children and adults, the unborn and very young children are especially sensitive to radiation.
8.
Mr. Sinderman testified that the purpose of a public information pamphlet like the New Pamphlet is to describe actions to be taken by the residents within the emergency planning zone around a nuclear facility in the event of a radiological accident.1d/
The purpose of the radiation discussion in the pamphlet is to provide the public with a reasonable amount of information on radiation 12/
Tr. 1302.
13/
Tr. 1303-1305.
14/
Tr. 1296.
. exposure.15/
The radiation discussion in the New Pamphlet was written in a basic manner intended for the lay public, recognizing that they are not experts in the field of radiation protection.15!
9.
A review of the radiation discussion in the New Pamphlet, as amended, reveals a balanced presentation of the following information: the sources of radiation and how radiation is measured; the presence and amount of background radiation from common sources with illustrations; the effects of radiation on humans with specific attention given to the extra sensitivity of unborn and young children to radiation and the uncertain health effects of low-level radiation; a description of a postulated accident with the aid of a diagram of a nuclear power reactor containment building;12/
the influence of weather on a radiation release; the effects of the dominant radioactive materials which would likely be released during an accident; and a glossary of basic nuclear terms.
This discussion on radiation successfully provides basic information to the lay public.1S/
l t
15/
Tr. 1295-1296.
16/
Tr. 1296.
17/
The diagram of the containment building as it presently appears in the New Pamphlet describes the concrete con-tainment of the Palisades Nuclear Plant.
Mr. Sinderman indicated the diagram will be modified to accurately reflect that there is only a steel containment building at the Big Rock Point Plant.
Tr. 1298.
18/
Tr. 1296.
! 10.
In her testimony, Ms. Christa-Maria set forth a number of other criticisms of the radiation discussion found in the New Pamphlet.
She would expand the glossary to include an explanation of alpha, beta and gamma radiation and information concerning the half-lives and ingestion pathways of plutonium and all other radioisotopes as well as the cumulative and long term effects of radiation.1E/
Mr.
Sinderman testified it was not necessary to include this information in the glossary.
The pertinent radionuclides and their half-lives are already discussed elsewhere in the pamphlet and further discussion would not serve the overall purpose of the pamphlet.22/
The existence of plutonium at the Big Rock Point plant is common to all reactors and does not pose any significant distinct additional public risk in a radiological emergency deserving of special attention in the pamphlet.21/
Explaining the distinction between alpha, beta, and gamma radiation would also not serve the purpose of the pamphlet since exposure to the public in a radiological emergency would be limited primarily to gamma radiation and a certain amount of beta radiation, both of which interact with tissue in a similar manner.
Distinguishing between the types of radiation would complicate the pamphlet and defeat 19_/
Tr. 1187-1188.
20/
Tr. 1299.
21/
Tr. 1300-1301.
_g_
its purpose of seeking to convey only the essential information in a simp 1e and straight-forward manner.22_/
11.
Ms. Christa-Maria thought that the New Pamphlet should contain a diagram of the human body indicating the effects of radiation on different organs.33/
Mr. Sinderman considered such diagrams inappropriate because in his judgment they " promote fear."
Moreover, diagrams of the human body are unnecessary for inclusion in the Big Rock public in-formation pamphlet because the only significant radionuclide which would be released during a reactor accident that also accumulates in organ tissue, is already adequately addressed in the pamphlet,SAI and the remaining significant primary radionuclides, the noble gases and halogens, do not accumulate in tissue.15_/
12.
Ms. Christa-Maria also thought that the analogy between sunburn and radiation exposure found in the New Pamphlets 5! should address the possibility of skin cancer from exposure to sunlight.21/ Mr. Sinderman stated 22/
Tr. 1301.
23/
Tr. 1204-1205.
Christa-Maria introduced a diagram she l
would consider appropriate.
Intervenors Exhibit 7, Tr. 1745.
24/
Tr. 1308; consumers Power Company Exhibit No.
5, p.
21.
25/
Tr. 1307-1308, 26/
Consumers Power Company Exhibit No.
5, p.
17.
22/
Tr. 1203.
. that such additional information would not be relevant to the purpose of the pamphlet.
The analogy between sunlight and radiation was to illustrate in a commonly understood manner that longer exposure leads to more severe effects.28/
13.
The remainder of Christa-Maria's concerns are not matters of controversy since the evidence reveals that Consumers intends to meet those concerns.
Specifically, the containment building diagram will be modified to accurately reflect the building at the Big Rock Point Plant and changes will be made which address the sensitivity of unborn and young children to radiation and their need for early evacuation.
As noted previously, the evidence and subsequent stipulation by Licensee demonstrate a commitment to effect these changes. 29/
14.
The cross examination of Mr. Sinderman and the testimony of Christa-Maria did not develop any evidence contrary to Mr. Sinderman's testimony that the radiation discussion in the Few Pamphlet, as amended by the testimony of Messrs. Loomis and Sinderman and the stipulation of Licensee herein,30/ is adequate for the purpose intended.
A review of the pamphlet, as amended, shows it to be a well-balanced presentation of the essential radiation information that comports with the overall purpose of the pamphlet which is to inform the public of emergency actions should the need 28/
Tr. 1306-1307.
20/
Supra, fn. 17 and 57.
30/
Id.
' arise.
The Licensing Board is compelled by the weight of the evidence to conclude that the radiation discussion is adequate to inform the public of radiation hazards.
- Thus, the Licensing Board finds that the New Pamphlet is adequate to inform people about radiation hazards, particularly to children and pregnant women.
B.
Adequacy of Pamphlet Distribution.
15.
Mr. Loomis testified as to Licensee's plan to distribute the New Pamphlet.
The New Pamphlet will be i
- n. ailed directly to the approximately 2500 boxholders within the plume exposure emergency planning zone, which, in the case of the Big Rock Point Plant, is a five mile radius around the plant.51/
This mail distribution is being accomplished through a local professional service which has the list of boxholders and has attained a bulk rate mail permit.]2/
Mr. Loomis anticipated mailing the pamphlet this summer and testified that the mailing will be to those addressees appearing on a " summer list" which reflects the largest of the seasonal populations for the area.]3/
Within the five-mile emergency planning zone around the Big Rock plant, the i
31/
Loomis Testimony, pp. 5, 6.
32/
Loomis Testimony, p.
6; Tr. 1103-1104.
--33/
Tr. 1133, 1140-1141, 1150-1151.
Mr. Loomis indicated that if the mailing is done in the winter using the more limited " winter list", the Licensee will undertake to distribute the pamphlet again in the summer of 1983 to assure that all summer residents are sent a copy of the New Pamphlet.
Tr. 1151.
. Emergency Service Directors for the two local counties will supply additional pamphlets to public places which will have already received one copy by mail, such as motels, Chambers of Commerce, and city and county buildings.2A!
Beyond the five-mile radius, the New Pamphlet will be distributed by hand to public places such as motels, stores, Chambers of Comme rce, and County and City Buildings.
Distribution beyond the five-mile radius will be accomplished by the Emergency Services Directors.2b!
Printing of the final version of the proposed New Pamphlet, as approved by the Licensing Board, will be completed and distribution will be made thereof within one and a half months from the time of the Licensing Board's partial initial decision on this matter.25!
l 16.
The Licensing Board does not believe it is necessary to weigh the merits of the distribution of the first Big Rock Point Plant pamphlet.31/
The present distribution plan differs considerably from the original distribution which relied to a considerable degree on door-to-door distribution by Boy Scouts.
Any deficiency in the orignal distribution is of no consequence in view of the present i
34/
Tr. 1138.
35/
Loomis Testimony, p.
6; Tr. 1104-1105.
36/
Tr. 1147-1148.
37/
Consumers Power Company Exhibit No.
4.
13 -
distribution plan which relies on a professional mailing service and the U.S.
Post Office.
Intervenors sought to impeach the credibility of Licensee's plans to distribute the New Pamphlet based on alleged inadequacies of the prior distribution of the original pamphlet.
However, intervenors neither presented any testimony nor elicited any evidence through cross examination which raised any question concerning the adequacy of the distribution method intended for the proposed pamphlet.
17.
The Licensing Board finds that Licensee's plan for distribution of the New Pamphlet is adequate to assure proper distribution of the pamphlet within the emergency planning zone and that Licensee is committed to implement the plan effectively.
III.
CONCLUSION OF LAW 18.
The New Pamphlet represents an acceptable l
implementation of regulations of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, namely 10 C.F.R.
S 50.47(b) (7) and Appendix E thereto; and there is reasonable assurance that the publication I
and distribution of the New Pamphlet is in furtherance of l
the protection of the health and safety of the public.
l l
l l
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
Docket No. 50-155-OLA CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY
)
(Spent Fuel Pool
)
Modification)
(Big Rock Point Nuclear Power
)
Plant)
)
CERTIFICxTE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of Consumers Power Company Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law on Subcontention (3) and that Portion of Subcontention (2) of Christa-Maria contention 9 Concerning. the Emergency Planning Public Information Pamphlet were served on the persons listed below by deposit in the United States mail, first-class postage prepaid, this 2nd day of July, 1982.
Peter Bloch, Esquire Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Dr. Oscar II. Paris Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Mr. Frederick J.
Shon Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
O O Atomic Safety And Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Appeal Board Panel U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 Docketing and Service Section Richard J.
Goddard, Esquire Of fice of the Secretary Counsel for NRC Staff U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 Richard G.
Bachmann, Esquire Judd Bacon, Esquire Counsel for NRC Staff Consumers Power Company U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory 212 West Michigan Avenue Commission Jackson, Michigan 49201 Washington, D.C.
20555 Herbert Semmel, Esquire Ms. Christa-Maria Urban Law Institute Route 2, Box 108C Antioch School of Law Charlevoix, Michigan 49720 2633 16th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Mr. John O 'Neill, II Mr. Jim Mills Route 2, Box 44 Route 2, Box 108 Maple City, Michigan 49664 Charlevoix, Michigan 49720 Ms. JoAnne Bier 204 Clinton Charlevoix, Michigan 49720 9m ob d
_b seph/Gallo
..