ML20059L208

Discusses Disposal of Radioactive Contaminated Sand from Discharge Canel at Plant.Requests Public Hearing to Discuss Subj

ML20059L208
Person / Time
Site:	Pilgrim
Issue date:	12/01/1993
From:	Lampert M DUXBURY NUCLEAR ADVISORY COMMITTEE
To:	Selin I, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML20059L191	List: ML20059L187 ML20059L208
References
NUDOCS 9402030283
Download: ML20059L208 (3)

Text

-t Duxbury Nuclear Advisory Committee 148 Washington Street Duxbury, Massachusetts 02332

• December 1, 1993 I Chairman Ivan Selin U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Re: Disposal of Radioactive Contaminated Sand From Discharge Canal - Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station

Dear Chairman:

The accompanying article, " Pilgrim to send sand to sea" ran in the local press on November 24, 1993. The thought of Boston Edison being allowed to dump 75,000 cubic yards of radioactive contaminated sand from the discharge canal into the sea is, if true, of concern.

According to the article, "One of the 14 tests of the sand showed a minute trace of cobalt-60, which is attributable to the power plants operation". We ask, who determined the amount was " minute" and on what basis? Who did the tests? Were there any other radioactive contaminants? What are the rules and requirements? We need more information. In reviewing Boston Edison's required Annual Environmental Reports, samples taken from the discharge canal have shown radioactive contaminants.

Just recently, the national press lambasted the Russians for disposing of low level radioactive waste off the coast of Japan. The United _ States and other nations signed an accord banning disposing radioactive waste at sea this fall.

Therefore, something is very wrong with this picture; or, as David Tarantino (spokesman for Boston Edison) said at the conclusion of the accompanying article, "We're not dealing with a situation here where rationality always prevails".

We request, as citizens of a seaside community and l neighbors of Pilgrim, the NRC holds a public hearing in i Plymouth. At the meeting, the detailed plan for testing the material, the role of the NRC, " allowable limits" of residual I radioactivity should be clearly explained and justified to the public before the sand is dredged. Only in this way will 9402030283 940127 PDR ADOCK 05000293 p PDR

s k

.h the public feel we are dealing with a situation where

" rationality prevails".

Thank.you for your attention to this matter having considerable and potential health consequences. We look forward to your response and appreciate your efforts to involve the public.

Very truly yours,

~%

y' )^ta-rt [e l g z y rCs Mary Elizabeth Lampert Chair, Duxbury Nuclear Advisory Committee

i

- 1 4 e I

Pilgri.m to send sand out to sea l was verwhehned by naturally said Thomas Boulette, senior Not 'sultable,

j. occurnng radiation, they said, vice president of nuclear. "We for beaches and the amount was so small can't afrord to do it because we By DeWayne Lehman that if a person spent a lifetime would be opening ourselves up MPG Newspsoe's g e sa e b dh" level of cobalt-60, he would take According to Boulette, some-'

PLYMOUTH - While towns in only a fraction of what the one could make an issue out of all along the South Shore la- federal government has deter- putting the sand on beaches, ment their sand-s tarved mined to be safe. According to forcing Edison to reclaim it. In .'

beaches, plans are being made the Edison officials, advances in the process of picking up all the to haul approximately 75,000 cu- testing technology - which an- sand, Edison would end up with '

bic yards of sand to sea for alyze material for 12 to 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> more than twice as much, he dumping. That's the equivalent to determine its radioactivity - said, and the cost of wLa.g of 3,000 to 4,000 semitruck-loads are capible of determining the sand and disposing of it as full of sand. much smaller levels than be- low-level radioactive waste Boston Edison plans to begin fore. could be so great as to shut the dredging the small bay area in "If we were looking at this plant down. Neither Edison offt-fmnt of Pilgrim nuclear power (sand) 10 years ago, we proba- cials nor anyone else has come plant next year,.and some area bly wouldn't have found this (co- up with a way to reduce the' ommN have been eying the balt-60) because of the technol- company's liability for the sand, project as a source of free sand ogy," said Edward Kraft, vice Boulette added.

to replenish beaches. But de- president of nuclear operations In explaining the test results, spite the depleted condition of and plant operation. "It's there Edison officials said they didn't many beaches and officials' ex- because the technology is be- know the cause of the "very, pressed interest in using the coming better and better." . very small amount" of cobalt-60, sand, Edison officials say they Edison officials said despite which is not normally present in will load the sand into barges, the interest in the "beautifui" nature. They emphasized a take it out to sea 40 to 50 nties, and " clean" sand, putting it on clean history of environmental i and dump it, area beaches could create a testing of gardens, produce, and The problem, Edison officials public relations nightmare and dairy. .

said two weeks ago during an perhaps lead to fiscal suicide. "The reality ofit is, it's incon-editorial staff meeting, is that "By law, if we followed the sequential," spokesman David one of 14 tests of the sand federal codes, we could do what . Tarantino said, but added that a -

showed a minute trace of these people are suggesting," firm decision has been made to cobalt-60, which is attributable Kraft said, but Edison won't be- dispose of the sand. "We're not to the power plant's nuclear op- cause of the possible cdticism dealing with a situation here eration. But that indication of and liability that could ensue. where rationality always pre- '

nuclear-related radioactivity "It's really a tragic situation," vails." _

. _ . . _ _ . ,_ .m_-

--"l Wednesday, November 24,1993 DUXBURY REPORTER Pg. A5 )

I l

-i i

-