ML20067C957
| ML20067C957 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cooper  |
| Issue date: | 06/30/1971 |
| From: | Price H US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | Thone C HOUSE OF REP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20067C396 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-90-173 NUDOCS 9102120268 | |
| Download: ML20067C957 (2) | |
Text
.
i
,_-__f_
v s., m.
1 0_
.t JUlf 3 01971 ll-N,.
- F.onorabic Charlos *Ihone llouco of ' Represtentatives 2
Dear lir. Thone:
- -p This is in reply to your letter of April 28, 1971, regarding the i
. {'
concerns c::ptcoued by lirs. Joff Broady of Drowaville, Nebraska,
.cbout ths Cooper Nuclear Station.
I cm enclosing a otaff report
[--
rnsponding to ifra.-Broady'u letter.
1 an alr.o cnclosing for !!rs. Brondy's informntion our June 7 press -
announcensut_ on.the propo::cd catablichnent of nunorical guidance.to kccp radioactivity in light-vater-cooled nucicar power reactor of flu-cuto' no _ low ac pract$cabic.
If we can be of further assictance to you or tira. Broady, _ please let-me know.
Sincercly,
-( tI{;ned ) Harold L Price--
9102120268 901219L llarold L. Price PDR FOIA
(
-DEKOK90-173 PDR:
Dircetor-of Reguistion-l-
~
'f..
Enclocurcs -
- 1. : Staff Report 4
2;. Press Announeccent, dtd 6/7/71
- 1
- DISTRIBUTION:
11LPrice.
j
. j OCR-(2):
1PAltorr10
.LRRogero-Id'cnncha L L w p h (j7 f L:~f '~c, py g D
- JilCook [(DR-3352)
C
, 7 ;1
-GErtter PDR-(50-298,
y g f' A 8 )A 6 -
p[
i YA..
6 c? 1
&$.2/7/.
" Z' C "' T(/
DR OCR
. REP.
CRESS - onict,
DRI DRL
- 72, R01:jj_
""7' ' " " ' " " ""'NC"kf.I
" ~ " ~ " " " ' " " "~ """'"
7 h
APK( ncko:bly PAMorris i
LRRonero ilLPric'c
. summe >
6/
/71'
- 6/ /71 16/16/71 6/I /71 6/ ';/71 6/N/./71
~<.
~.. ~...... -..
- N"*.
.. O.? >. w::.".* : ~
~ *-
~v
~ " ~ ~?nt=:.w :.
Fone ALC-lis (Rev.9 53) ALCM 0240
.
- u s cove n ut t ew.ou. oe r ect nn nm
/
... ~......
,1 s
(
(
l I
STAFF REPORT ON INQUIRY BY MRS. JEFF BROADY Mrs. Broady's principal concern appears to be what she terms a discrepancy between estimates of exposure set forth in a Public Health Service report on the Cooper nuclear station and estimates made by the Atomic Energy Cocnission, k'e assume that Mrs. Broady is referring to Figure 4, page 22, of the April 8, 1968, U.S. Public llealth Service report which is a graph j
showing a plot of the theoretica_l, release rate of iodine-131 versus dis-tance from the reactor where cattle might graze near the Cooper nuclear
.j station that theoretien11v would result in an exposure of 0.5 reo per year j
to the thyroid of a one-year-old child who ingests milk produced by cattle 8
that graze on iodine contaminated pastures.
This curve does not represent l'
the levels of radioactivity that will actually be released in the operatio:
of the Cooper nucicar station.
The design characteristics of the Cooper nuelcar station indicate that actual release. rates of iodine from this plant would be less than a~few percent of_that indicated by the theoretical curves in the PilS report.
Mrs. Broady also refers to a study by the U.S. Public 11ealth Service conducted in 1968 at the Dresden nuclear power station in 7111nois that i-indicates that traces of radionuclides were detected in cattic thyroids
]
and corn kernels around the Dresden station.
These, levels were barely i
detectabic above background radiation.
In evaluating the significance of their findings at the Dresden station, the Public Health Service states on page 87 of the report BHR/ DER 70-1 reporting the Dresden study that "On the basis of these measurements, exposure to the surrounding population throush consumption of food and water fron radionuclides released at j
Dresden was not censurabic.
External exposure from radioactive gases dis-charged from the Dresden stack was detectable, but it was only a _ small fraction of tha natural radiation background over an extended pericd of
- time, and well within Federal Radiation Council guidance"..
- t-Requirements which would be incorporated in any operating license for the,
Cooper nuclear station would require that the levels of radioactivity in effluents be maintained as low as practicable. Operating experience with
. power reactors of similar design indicate that levels of radioactivity off-site from the Cooper station will not be significantly altered. Therefore,
,j
-there is no reason to expect that cattle near the Cooper station will be any diffcrent than those many miles away.
By AEC requirement, Nebraska Public Power District must have a complete program of environmental monitoring to confirm the results of.the primary cor, trol, which is ef fluent monitoring.
The methods of monitoring are
. principally those which are continuous and integrating.
- A number of di-rections are covered, so that vagaries of wind direction are taken into account.
Specific nuclide analyses are also required.
Further, the l
/
!