ML20062E905

Responds to Re Alleged Conditions Near Facility. Airborne & Waterborne Radioactivity Monitoring Programs Discussed.No Reason Exists to Believe That There Is Any Radiological Impact on Environ from Operation of Facility

ML20062E905
Person / Time
Site:	Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png
Issue date:	07/19/1982
From:	Dircks W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
To:	Humphrey G SENATE
Shared Package
ML20062E908	List: ML20062E905 ML20063C519
References
NUDOCS 8208100370
Download: ML20062E905 (5)

Text

-

,g

' j.?

JUL 19 y n The Honorable Gordon J. liumphrey 7g United States Scnate _47 Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Senator Humphrey:

Thank you for your letter of lune 21, 1982 addressed to Chaiman Palladino regarding concerns about the Vemont Yankee facility in Vernon, Vermont.

One of your constituents had provided you with a magazine article that made several allegations related to the proximity of the Vemont Yankee plant.

As a result of your request, we have looked into the thrust of the allega-tions raised in the article.

There are two concerns in our view: First is the allegation that the Vermont Yankee facility is releasing substantial quantities of radioactive material; second is the allegation that there are noticeable and direct of fsite effects attributable to Vement Yankee.

Federal regulations, 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, and 10 CFR 50, Appendix I, establish limits on the types and quantities of radioactive materials which may be released in effluents from nuclear power plants. 40 CFR 190 estab-lishes limits on both the projected annual radiation dose equivalent and total quantity of radioactive material entering the environment from the uranium fuel cycle. The 10 CFR regulations and the operating license issued by the NRC to the owner and operator of the Vernont Yankee facility require operable in-plant effluent nonitoring systems to measure and record radio-activity in the radioactive materials waste treatment and disposal systems as well as implementation of an onsite and of fsite radiologic ' environmental monitoring program.

In-plant effluent monitoring systems must meet specific operability and calibration standards established by the NRC. An NRC resident inspector is stationed at the Vemont Yankee facility and he routinely inspects and verifies the proper operation of these systems.

Vermont Yankee's environmental monitoring program includes analyses of i

airborne and waterborne radioactivity and direct radiation exposures. The airborne radioactivity monitoring program includes samples of milk, vegeta-t tion, food products and soil from several locations near the Vemont Yankee facility, including the liinsdale, New ilampshire area. The waterborne radio-

activity monitoring program includes sanples of fish, aquatic vegetation, Connecticut River water and sediment, and ground water samples. Again, multiple sampics are taken during the year at various locations in New Hampshire, Vemont and liassachusetts. Direct radiation exposures are measured by thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) which are placed by the licensee at twenty-one locations on and off the Vernont Yankee site. These devices provide a neasurement of the total radiation exposure, including natural background exposure at thase locatioris.

I l l ovr B208100370 B20719 "" - - - * " ' " " ~ """'"* * * * * * ' " " " '

._ r,oRaoocaOs000271 PDR om .p .

.. . .. . .. . . j . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . .

enc ronu m oreo3 nncu oaa OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usa mi-mm

}

/

The Honorable Gordon J. Hunphrey The results of analyses obtained from the environnental monitoring programs are evaluated and documented by the licensee. The licensee provides an ennu sl Radiological Environmental Report and a Semi-Annual [f fluent Release Report, as well as special reports, when required, to the NRC. These reports are placed in the fiRC's Public Document Room and are also reviewed by NRC regional office inspection specialists.

In addition to the actions taken by the licensee, the NRC also conducts its own measurenents to independently assess the licensee's results.

The (IRC progran provides for review of the licensee's sampling program and includes an independent measurements program whereby aliquots of etfluent samples are analyzed by the licensee, by our Region I office, and by a national laboratory. The results are compared to confirm the validity of the licensee's analytical techniques. In addition, the NRC places therno-luminescent dosineters at various locations near all nuclear power plants, including Vermont Yankee. The flRC first placed TLDs around the Vermont Yankee site in May 1930. There are 40 TLD locations around the site ranging j

from less than one to about nineteen miles away. To date, no exposures were measured which were above those which would be expected f rom natural back-I ground radiation.

In response to your request, reports from the licensee have been re-examined.

A review of the licensee's Semi-Annual Ef tluent Release Reports for the period 19/6 through 1981 indicates that the projected annual dose equivalent based on actual effluent and meteorological measurements did not exceed the environnental standards for the uranium fuel cycle (40 CFR 190). 40 CFR 190 specifies linits on both annual dose and total quantity of radioactive mterial entering the environnent f rom the uranium f uel cycle. Also, a review of the licensee's Annual Radiological Environmental Surveillance Reports for the period 1976 through 1981 indicates only a slight difference in the annual dose equivalent between environmental nonitoring stations which might be af fected by plant operations and background (control) stations not af fected by plant operations. In all cases, the difference in the annual dose equiva-lent was rauch less than the 40 CFR 190 limits. Additionally, the dose rates measured by the NRC during operation of the NRC's TLD Direct Radiation Network, and the enount of radioactive material in etfluents from the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station actually measured by the NRC, support the licensee's conclusion. We have, theref ore, no reason to believe there is any radio-logical impact on the environment trom the operation of the Vemont Yankee facility.

The State or Venaont also monitors the environnent around Vernant Yankee and provides a monthly report to rur Region ! office. These reports reflect findings that releases of radioactivity from Vernont Yankee are very small (nuch less than penaitted) ar.o tnat levels of radioactivity in the environ-r.ent (air, water, particulates and milk) are not r;uch dif ferent than back-ground levels obtained prior to the operation of Vennont Yankee.

t

>  ?

s The Honorable Gordon J. Humphrey With regard to the problems at the Fostyck fam, we understand that the New Hampshire State Department of Health and Welfare conducted radiation surveys in the vicinity of tne fam. We contacted Ms. Diane Tefft from the Bureau of Environmental Health who stated to us that they found no radiation levels above background. The Bureau routinely samples a fam contiguous to the Fostyck fam and has found no evidence of radiation above background. If you have any further questions,lis. Tefft will be happy to discuss them with you. She can be reached at 603-271-4588.

In addition, we contacted Dr. George Cilley, the l'ew Hampshire State Veterinarian, who stated that he had visited the Fostyck fam in April 1981 af ter receiving a call regarding premature and deformed calves. He stated that his impression was that the f am was not experiencing any more problems than fams elsewhere in the state. In his opinion, there was no evidence of particular problems related to Vemont Yankee. He can be reached at 603-271-2404 if you have f urther questions.

If, in the future, we identify any further information regarding the concerns discussed in your letter we will contact your office.

If I or my staff can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sin

]stened)T. A.Rehm William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations Distribution:

W. Dircks T. Rehm V. Stello i H. Denton l

R. DeYoung R. Minogue l G. Cunningham I

L. Underwood R. Haynes R. Starostecki l ED0 12043 l SECY-82-0662 PDR l LPDR i Docket No. 50-271 RI:RA ED0- 0,C4 I Region I Docket Room RHaynes WJD)rrJgt. p i .

OCA 7/g/82 7//f/82 l

(TRANSMITTED VIA IBM 5520 7/15/82)

RI:DPRP RI:DPRP RI: SLO RI:DEPOS RI:PA0 RI:DPRP RI:DRA l "'I "6slT67sfi" BFUHHEP"""' BP'EnVi6His6" '

Y6fdsi" '"..

AYiitah3ih" M3".Bil3EB" TY3".". " ' ."..

SURNAME) . . . . . , . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . .. . ....n . ....o.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

D ATE ) . . . . . . . . . . .

I NRC FORM 318 00 80) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usam mi-mm

d -

FHOM. [ ACTION CONTROL DATES CONTROL NO

/ Co m oEAou~E

,g e, 12043

$d3 IdrdQU mI. I!UO'Ph rSf AC KN OW LE DG M E N T f( D ATE OF DOCUMENT INTE RIM HE PLY g 9 10; ~

, j, PHLVAr1L FOT4 SIGNATURE OF:

FINAL REPLY j . j f' ,} r .U, C CHAlHMAN Ctairman Palladino rlLE LOCATION g< gy t>rsen- $] CXECUT4VE DIRECTOH l O ESCRIPTION .]LLT1LR UMEMo O REWJRT O OTHEn SPECI AL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS Rcq info about alleged conditions near Vermnt Yankee plant per attached magazine article fm constitutent CLASSIFIED DATA OOCUME NT/ COPY No. CLA%1FICATIONl NisunER OF PAGES CATEGOHY POS T A L H E GIS T R Y NO. O NSI O 90 0 FRO ASSIGNED TO. DATE INFORMATION ROUTING LEGAL REVIEW U FINAL O COPV h ynE5.f.29 7 _5/25/2?L Dircks ^"'"" ""

CorRell DeYoung gggg g

$rE a E co Aovm Counts or

- ek

• j U TN COMME N TS. NOTIF Y LUndertood 0 1.

g ggg _ _ . . _ - _.

JCAE NOTIFICATION RECOMMENDED: O YES O NO NHCt m. 232 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOH FOH OPER ATION,5 DO NOT REMOVE THIS COPY,

, PRINCIPAL CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL 4 o, a

C L J- g 2 3 3 E

' E t  ! A z s8 i A. :- e o E

s _ ii2 Ed r e-:  : a P

u. s.. g u e e.  % -.o u. .

3.

. e <

o!o8 red c=

8

-v >

s R, g >' 4.:t.: E i e

. 9 egs u -q o e C h33$ c o

c c $ lb u O 09

> j >[ ,, Ej.v o

y .

ai

.- e s

4 2'

.c n.

M s P J el 2 ;, E Z5

--- O E o 3 7 c: o p J3 4 E v' w C &

e p s c = -

m

= z E *

.c 4 e s 8 x +>

2 g it a

u ig  ?> 1 &3 ?O u g W g.

E 2 e o Cp L 6 M E 0 ge ts c: -

<. y E

)hC2. E o e

(iE ni c, a.

E E h X u E -0 3se '4 : 2 -

e- a ,

g O 5 -

< E !2.

N *e c5 3 < c a, x

- -.c'

5. o.

0 8_ o oo ee W

W E kl 8' y o a o :s w x o ni .- -.

'.E

+> 3 ldg ra

5. . I I5 o

a 3- ao e 8 x s 8 6  :

QC Y g.. i .. gw

.. k im 2

El 4 5 g a -

t2 R E o e a: -

a 6 x 8x

-y mt

~ 6 o! 6 [*

ra a &L8'

= *s3 :s z 5 O

- - 8 8 8 -

= a a m t  !

o

[ m -.

. - - - - - ~

l  ;