ML20062J808
| ML20062J808 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 11/04/1980 |
| From: | Charles E, Charles M AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| To: | Snyder B Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8011120380 | |
| Download: ML20062J808 (3) | |
Text
.
25)
Ne.'h u..: f dd.-
Q F m m. >.,
p Novemb:e=r,%,' 1980
.. m ' "..
'M_.3..e.-
- , - m e
33 sr.,e
-}en Dr. Bernard J. Snyder, Program Director Three Mile Island Program Office U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission JjjE. !:CE3 T
Washington, D.C.
20555 s'd1
.n
Dear Mr. Snyder,
I know that the NRC is interested in our co=ments and questions on the Environmental Imoact Statement.
After reading the EIS, I have the following questions and/or co=ments.
- 1. Why has Cumberland County been left out of the total EIS (3-1917 You have given no information on the population, geography,etc. is given for Cumberland County.
Please use the 1980 census statistics instead of 1970 census statistics for the final EIS.
No =ention is made of two major military installations in the area - New Cumberland Army Depot and the Mechanicsburg l
Navy Depot.
What would happen if these facilities were forced to close because of another accident at TMI Unit II?
Many employees of these depots did leave the area during harch 1979 It seems strange to me that you discuss Lancaster and even Gettysburg, but do not give any consideration to these u.".11tary.
installations.
l
- 2. Where will the high and low level waste materials l
from the Unit II cleanup be sent?
It is general knowledge that the Hanford Washington will probably not be available after 1981 for nuclear plant waste. (NUREG 0732)
I was glad to see that you had a new map for the route
(-
to be used for weste transportation. (Question 110)
- However, I do not like your answer, " Currently the truck goes...".
l What about future use?
Will you use the route shown in the EIS draft?
On page 2-1 you state, "It is unlikely that the site could be qualified as a candidate high-level waste. repository site because of such factors as nearby population densities and hydrology.".eThischas-disturbed many of us.
What is the difference between site selection for high level waste and site selection for a nuclear power plant?
At a meeting l
in Swarata Township John Collins stated that it is possible that we could have nuclear waste at TMI for 50 to 60 years.
To my children and I this represents a rather permanent l
storage site.
Po/7 s
gngoW h
I l
l
2 Is the waste that is stored on the island considered to be safe from air traffic accidents?
The NRC said that the reactor buildings were safe from air collision, how about the waste naterials and the pools of water in which the rods are to be kept?
The Harrisburg International Airport was not mentioned in the EIS draft.
- 3. Met Ed has slowed clean up operations and reduced staff because of financial proble=s.
When does the NBC step in to keep the clean up operations going and to maintain a pace the NRC has considered to be so important?
What will happen to the clean up and the plant if Met-Ed goes bankrupt?
- 4. What ever happened to the evacuation plans?
It has been over 18 months since the accident and the public has still not been infor=ed or issued evacuation plans. Why wasn't an evacuation plan part of the EIS?
At no place in the EIS is the possibility of evacuation due to problens during clean up mentioned?
k 5.Can Unit I be used to help in the cleanup of Unit II?
For example, could Unit I be used to store waste water, could storage pools be used, or could it help provide better security?
Is it hazardous to have Unit I go back on line prior to having Unit II cleaned-up?
Should information on Unit I be included in the final EIS?
It seems that public officials do not want to discuss Unit I bacause of the hearings on Unit I restart.
- 6. Figure 3 1-2.
Cumberland County and its county seat, Carlisle are not on the map.
Neither is Mechanicsburg, where the Naval Supply Depot is located or New Cumberland, where the Army Depot is located.
The corrected map on page 24 of-the Question and Answer Booklet should be corrected to show TMI in Dauphin and not Lebanon County.
- 7. Many of your references are secondary references.
c For example, in References--Sec. 3 1, reference 3 is a geology s..
text book, " Structural Geology of North America."
Ple.ase include the state, federal, and contracted studies in your reference list.
Use original sources.
Much of what you use frcm Reference 1, is outdated material and should be cheered be6 ore being used.
What is the geology 1000 feet down?
Should you know this information if you are going to store waste in the area?
I was also concerned about you references for weather and hydrology.
I hope your weatner information is based on more than Reference 9 - Local Cli=atological Data.
Shouldn't you have additional weather data if you are to release krypton, etc.?
What are the upper linds aloof, etc.?
Concerning hydrology (3-6) I think you should check your information on the pump storage facility consisting of two reservoirs and dass scheduled for completion in 1980-1984.
Please update the Stony Creek Project.
Will this change your flood forecast for TMI?
What is the height of the dike or flood wall around the island'and the waste storage areas?
3 I have the aerial photographs of Three Mile Island during the flood of June 1972.
On the photographs it appears as if nost of the island was covered.
Is this true. Is it true that the bridges and access to the plant were inundated?
8.On page 3-24 you state that "The continuing tension see=s related to two issues: future decomination plans for TMI-2 and a distrust of those responsible for these activities.",
I think that you have neglected to mention another source of tension and that is the prospect of Unit 1 being allowed to restart.
Living in the shadow of the TMI towers is bad enough at the present tire without having the additional threat of another accident at the plant being a part of our lives. The estimated time for cleanup is 7 to 10 years this alene is enough to cause stress for many of us.
- 9. Where are the containers holding resins frc= the Epicor II being stored?
I have recently read from Inside NRC that radioactive decay of isotopes stored in some of the containers
's on site may be causing the resins to degrade into a jelly-like matter that could emit gases and cause the canisters to corrode.
The possible solution to this dile=a was said to be onsite incineration.
Would this incineration release additional radiation into the atmosphere?
Now that we hare lived through the week long venting of krypton, and continue to live with the almost weekly ventings of additional kyrpton do we have yet another large emmission of radioactive gas to look forward to?
Sincerely yours PA. f/ L _
=~y $:- ChA
/
k Edwin and Mary Ann Charles cc:
Gus Speth Allen Ertel Bill Goodling Governor Thornburg