ML20067C970
| ML20067C970 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cooper  |
| Issue date: | 11/24/1971 |
| From: | Broady J AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| To: | Schlesinger J US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20067C396 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-90-173 NUDOCS 9102120274 | |
| Download: ML20067C970 (15) | |
Text
'
co u r e. ir n v-o. nm ~~.-
November 24, 1971
(
(
ilr. Jan.cs iichlusinger,
/
C h a i r n.a n, ntonic Cnurgy Commission
'!onhington, D.
C.
3 Duar Dr. Schlusinger, 1 have corresponded with the n[C before on the subjuct of the j
[
Cooper f;ucluar btation in my back yard.
I have always had the i
j feeling that the nEC concidors anyone who lives apart from
\\lashini; ton to hovu the intelligencu of a tun ydar old child.
I I
\\.e havo new leaourship in Washin0 ton now, I will try again.
i To bu trief, wo feud cattle curn we grow on our own farn. - 300 acron of which lies within the normal boundary linus of The f
largent 1%!R plant now under conutruction betwoon Chicago and Los Angelua, thn Cooper tiuclear Station.
Our food yarda are 1/2 mile down. wine thu ainpursal. stack, ho arn cuall, M'b wu are one f arm anong nany, but we feud out from 5-10 million pounds of buof per.
year.- This in cattle country, this do corn uconomy. Wu are not
.,n arca of "no importance".
/
Lu have not one cent allocateo for statu monitoring.
1 9
T i
i
..ith.the nerget of Iowa Powur and Light ~ with Illinoin Electric, I'
thu ponnibinty of al..iost all of thu power gunuratud from Coopur will go unst, thuru ic another rjinnt p.Lant plannad for Coopnr.
~
uu nave Public Powar in flubranha, this creatus a tax climato for thoco power componics that would indicate all efforts will be mas to occomplish thn objectives of hugo power companius in the east.
Am I wrong in saying tnat we cannot take-a chanco of radioactive
}
uptuko in our beef?
la.tt not truu that cattle ahoorb radionoci:
ano can pann them on to man, particularly when porn also absorbs thin ?
Ud j
" Design specificatinno", "entim.tod rulcasus",, "wedo3<Gt uxpeci u
1 R-3965 9102120274 901219 PDR FOIA DEKDK90-173 PDR
mu.
on t.ou t eiu n u - o 6.
inta.o woron hhvo no nuunang 60 4
IJut thotic poiuonn out itno our unvironment.
'I*, ouJihurotoly('Itsw I
liam wonduring whether unginenro and scin...inta havu yet nolved tnc proulumn of radiation ituskage:7 n.t i-ih.h p.i.nn t s.i r:ax r acini. inn.
Ilow onn anyono proninu dn that' Coope r
an
' T.
ult.o A..sk?
nui.ior - ir ooi p3 ant..nr kni n in that, aiuo noy 1.h o t Coupi.r an a " i.ic h b ".
lein mokuu i..u nervous, becausa dif f brerico betwcon. Life ond-ducth 1*or my f amily, h,. r u as the
[vnlu.. tion of the Coupur Ivucloa.r Station" - t,ays a
"icuolic hanith w11.hin a 15 - 20 500 saer.w./yr to oar childron uno drink our inilk, t
i 131 1 Cooper operaten like Dresdc.n 1.
-L mis u 2ndruc of T.or.pur.
1 iiCC logol limii.n SLD mromn/yr.
nEC uayn 5 mroma/ yr.
[)
'~b "'
If Cooper c.6n be feli. 20 niilro away at thu 500 mrums/yr lovci, thi:
i makun our lovn1 nuru 20 (milon) x 2-(diusipotion factor) x 500 mrt
-i fnet moi.en 20,000 rrums.
And notning han yet neun saiu about
_l ony of thu ut.hnr 2GO radionuclices that will be released from I
C u o r,a r.
'ur. Scnliuinger, that makub f or " DEhi H V all.c.Y".
1.
l, - !=
You will havu T.o uc.olt, tha1. thuro in quito a-uifirirunt ntury toen is being tulo by 1.nor. holding.opponing viewn on this sub,)oc
'i -
isnu of c ou i te n 1 or.. concerneo, tnis is tno differencu noten.nn L
(!: I lite una ductn.
4-r,inc e r ely,,,
-7
> l r..) L.-
~ < <
e'.1 8.
off iiroutiy p.n.
I unn't uvr.r.- lik e to harbor tho thought thht our food v111 trant,mit duntn to ar.here.
Coop.:r ?
Do you talk to Cooper ?
l-r Coopur will monito L
Erewnvills, Nahr64ka au s.. L. a
- s.,
3.e *l.s -,.w
..u r
sec.
n.
nuentnan Nuclear S6coty Information Conter
~
.v.
ocx Cok Ridge National L.nberatcr*u Cok Ridge, 7enn, 3783; s
De6: M.r. Duch6n6n, g
- h e vy :, m 2:.r.:a s e u r x u e u,.: s,.f a y
=,, w i n,.
- u,,..
. u n n. g a n,. to m.
uno.
th. c i r c. s... c,.,
- .f,.., m,,. 1_.
i O n t i t a c c
- 4 c & cit.c tip a c i fi c A n f W.i '.i.
4 l:
f..
..v.
- u s i c, t s - n e.._,1,.
.n.
..... u
..t " - i o n, the i t. r c o: t h u i l u n c,.... I.......J.
.."m.;.1 m. c,. o., ;,"... c. y a..,.
nuch 3'.41s p,
- nn
- .9, cur no m o, tm2,,
i
.w. - u,,nin, tne r,m o f m..,..s...,
u n...m...,, m. t o,"c, c.u
.e.
.a.,,, m.,.,
^k# 0"# liVinG fCUCin0 cuttic.thu ccra we grew n
u u
Cooper will be n "gion.",
with twc.t. ora cf tnace "Cinnts" on ihe drawing board on the come c i t e..
Tnc powcr produenc h. ira will be
.g used in tho sintco of Iowa and Illir '. c, not in Nebrasks, except for 4
a token omcunt to go to Linecin, Nuh.v.aku.
" conn hns noen si ed in tha mir;st of sno of the mcut,,romir.inc Ch*.tle icuciny crCOS i.*. thc UnitCc itc'Oc DOC 4V$u We Chn COOM Ac5=
irrigatan CGrn 6ac T,hiG CutG Cur prcGuClion CcSt$.
Wh nLVL j
/./'
cfficin..t w nOw sinuC tur plant just five milcc rwcy, with rcilrce..a c..t' h
rafri6cern?.ad cars thct will take cur beef into New Ycrk Ci'.,/ wi.nin, 1
j 24 hcurs 6fter slaughter.
i I
' he 6teste of Nchraska donc n. : intend to mo..itor Cacper.
7n
/ c'.ic
_. f U (.61 N cn th0 fCdCrn1 1CVC1~~h' TIS bd.:.
.,1gG:4d by it8 i t.c n r yd r......".
T u
/ i n t C6 Ino Cph.
'.'.' c Wil l h u V u nC Tecnitcring cf CcGpur
- f. Ac.;pt t h.,
- i.'..
- Our fier.i nInno will prndued Gomu E. i.'. l i o n p o u n c 0 n e hig n t',
l 6,
one farm nmcng many.
I f,,l $ o u t of 100 pocp'e in thi'c Arac c:c not ovan Know t h.i t J.o w,
y! c.it IndioGcT.iVity.
I f thili Wcic if, mC"ti0ndd, nn Al !.
u.',: c...'
- " c o rnmu ni s t", "ethiant", " nut", "kack".
A very affcct.ivo a: a. '. i,:.
I cid not raisa tha c,uuntions thct cro c4i C r:.iu..
!.:ic.
,, i a:
the "Public McL1th Zvnivotion of.no Occp..
1.'., c l o n r S t.. :., r
- ni c t.
O in a projection of the effectc of Occ,.ar
.'T Cooper spar..i..c
..t thu
.$ 1 e
.acvo os a.,. c u s..aa..
.s,
v...
a b...yac c.
.uus:.n G
- u..
. c, e r..........u.
w s
~,.
u tne best of all LWR planta 0.5:ar.:/yr for c cn / yon c'..
chi'c who ingents milk within c 15 20 mila rcci..c c f Cecpur.
/J/..,
WO A r c
.~.l 20 mi1LC Away.
I f r /.c i s '. i c t. Githipat05 Et An inVC cc fcc'.c
.' q
.2
- ~
2.
.n 4u.u..,ew.,
s,.
s G, ou
,ww.u
..u,.
s.
~
u.
.o vi
+.
w
- t. W o../
I c.id not wri,e pc. 139 cf "Pcison-- hacr", which c6ys, "If wC c '. l c w
/,j, tha permittac lov. i of cacium l',7 conc :rntion in tno air for juct n n,., i n,,
t
.,...4
/
a whoic.'scdy doce of ecvan rods cc a es.-
nt;oonce of just sno d a y ' :,
e w
.e ik Jh/
..I n
- UKpoGU Oe.
g
,cidn't ccusa thic centrcvaray
....but we ' re carc in tu s.aic.c '.
s f On 'nnc side uc cco
.he l,cr.cioiaity - or prcoubilit;,c of c :0%
. 'w..
,..ouoc t o o u r c h il c r o n ( r.c r o, c.,..
n wnneo...oaw n,
.. y... o c... s.......,
- r. n.,...
.w..
..w....
w.
8
.hnn SM'.) - cccordinC to 30fman ons G O !*.0 014 Tumplin, "uptoko of radionuclidae 1.
cur fccd" and it.nd contcminati All within.ha limita of oxiatino aswo.
Plu.s.the chance shot we will contc.t.inste u.ny, mcny other poople by f,
se4cing ccr.tsmanatuc baa;..
O n ; h u, c her cio'c of this contrcuaray wa cra tola "wa de not un.. : ph a O u
n oG i. u, S.:. s..
pi,:.~ C u. :.uS
.wa
~
n u.
w... u..., n
..w..
.... t. 0 o
u
. i. :
i
..o
.G u v
.'..i..?s w.
ww
.'......w...
.c.
a.
.. a.
... V 6.
...w w.
...w i
of UCCc Cc.T.phniCS yhD GnhL uG c u r n u n c' c a r.~..
. c.~. t ~hurJ & O $ '. c f i
O..Auc G Q, e....ci.
Gn.t.:.o.+.o.u.
....:..,.:. 9 r
w = r.
..w.g E
If *hu c o n G t r u C t i c r.
.; n 0. i ~..: r t.
a *;
'e o u u n '. O w ". n w t
.:.o i n t.. i r.
n
,,, f u acVC of Cm*"inGich re..tObc wt OrLGLun ALh C 4. n Gio r er.g inu u r '
a
.w Ccaper Oc '.nis(
3d1GiVC 20, We do "c'.
hava
.Au t.O p h i C i n t i C u t.. G JaginvJr5 4t Cocpar thOt /rCCcCn 1 Lid.
A c v. cbcGt Elk NiVt4 7
~
W c W.:..'
~
0Lw..
'd
., a p w b.: '.
.' w.
a.
.4.e t
Q
.O w...r. u /,,
~.*
a w.. i w.
r
.c
,. c.. a.t.u.
a t.~ c
.~.;cm.
. /,
....'. e e *> s. h..,.c c ove a.p,s.i.,
.~ s.
. u
.w v.
w
.^
consicereo '.0 timec tcc high) ?
AC~UMUL A~:','E figu: ; here.
i s.. e..x..e.5 w.
v
.v.:, _s -
- 1.,, n
- o. a.s. s. w., e........
- u. u V.
.. i
. w e..
ou ou owww...u # O. e..Vau,
.. L,
...i>
u..
.e
.w.
cnay h6vo.c'.c ma hat our ccckgcconc racist.icn ic 200-220, it ic nct IniG docs r.c; maku fvr confiO4nCO.
- 7. c. e n.e..
.s a c.
w. r.3 j,
o i,,
v...
o w
.. u ars, act.T.cn anc.cmpic.n wrong 7 outoro, not utter
' ow about en V.\\.
r.ooper s cris.
/a c
- r i
hcw about PROV!NG that 0.'d O'ilR plant' aver cparatad up to "dcoign l#/ - specifications" again, Jafore, not Afta-Ocopor star.r. ?
't WC - G r o M7 n '. "c.l' u m o t C wu fd.td Y,,.';U,, c o r :
drun Of nC it". par *bnCO" 4**
@ p, b c: 0 f, ilne i...si.
..c Arc a..
L
,e n. t c '. o bhd a pactul'd...
. ~.,
... a n t' v..
wra not'dispensanic, neither is our lend.
-o j
g' but vic'11 celi jo_.ynu.
We have no othor"cacice.
I woulon's eat cny of the food pre,decac on c : icnd AF77.Ts oc ;ar ctar-
- e. i n C C y c% y,
.y o
%\\
,-A0 a cu.s
/
Mrs. 'off 3.cady s
- I iI g.
I 1
1 I
I
/
'4g g
OAK.41DGE N ATIONAL LABORA*ivRY OPthATED BV UMON CARBIDE CORPORATION huCl( AR DIV$0h 6,w POST CFFICC $01 Y OAK #4DGC, TChht%S(C 374,36 hUCLEAR
'ET.Y..INF ORu AT 60N C E NT E R E.t.A M..v.F{_If J.Ov.enAL A
.n vo v e m.n. 3.,,,,
October 29, 1971 4
- s. Jeff Broad /
ovnville, Nebracha a
1 tr Mrs. Broady:
Environmentra 'npact of Cooper Nuclear Power Station Ti. nk you for your letter of October 1.
Yes, you are certainly entitled to ansvers to your questicas.
I vill attempt to answer a fev of them and A
f ex lain where you can exptet to find ansvers to the others.
Most of the c
po.i its you raise vill be covered with specific ansvers in Nebraska-Public I Pou r District's (KPPD). Environmental Report (ER) anc/or the U.S. Atomic I
Enc cgy Commicsion's Detailed Environmental Statement (DS) on the Cooper Nuclear Station.
i Before the plant enn be c;erated, the latter report must be approved by I
the Council on Environmen*.ta Quraity which is an advisory committee to the President.
I am contacting the AEC Division of Stdiological and Environ-mental Protection to recuest that your name be added to the distribution list for both of these do:uments.
The IR was finished in September of this year. Tne DS vill not be:ome available until some time in 1972.
These environmental repor:s.are requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Public Law 91-190);.a copy of which I am sending you
'under separate cover for your information (Attachment 1).
In particular.
item (C) unc'er Section 102 of the lav requires that the AEC as the respon-
"i sible Federal Agency make a detailed str.tement on:
(1) the environmental.
impact of the proposed action, (ii) any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented, (iii) alternatives to the i oposed action, (iv) the relationship between local short-term uses.of man's environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity, and (v) any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources which vould be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented.
I am also sendin6 an $nterim statement by the AEC on its policy and procc '
dure for "Implementatio.1 of National Eny'.ronmental Policy Act of 1969" as published in the Federal 3 egis +.cr of Nptember 9,1971 (Attachment 2).
/
i ir
-a,
- *i I
-Mrs. Jeff Iboudy
( \\
October 29, 1971 Vith respect to questionc you raised, I have the followin6 comments:
(1) Cooper Station Power Commitments.
According to the applicant's Envi-
.ronmental Report, iOT or the output of Cooper Station vill be made availabic to NPPD and 50% to Iova Power and Light. A quick review of the distribution systems of these companies shovs Cooper to be fairly centri.11y located in the transmission network which it is intended to serve.
(2) Site Selection.
Many factors are considered in siting a nuclear power
{
reactor and current use of the land in the vicinity of the proposed i
site is one of the items.
Specific details of the Cooper site selec-tion, land use, resource comn.itment, etc., can be,found in the ER and/or the DS.
(3) Environtcntal Monitoring.
It is trae that the Public Health Service (PHS) has become a part of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) i but they most assuredly have not been silenced.
To the contrary, en-vironmental monitoring programs of the PBS are being continued and expanded.
7ne results of this moni,oring program are reported regularly i
in the EPA publication, " Radiological Health Data and Reports" (Attach-l ment 3 is a sample copy).
(
In addition to the PHS activities, ;??D entered into a two year pre-operational radiation monitoring program with Toledyne Isotopes of Yestvood', Sev Jersey beginning on April 1, 1971.
NPPD adviced the AEC that the program "is desi ned to determine the background levels of 6
{
radioactivity in the various environmental media at the plant site and at suitable off-site locations in areas surrounding the plant site and to provide a base line upon which suosequent operational environmental f
radiatf or surveillance data can te evaluated." 'There vill be the usual i
sampling of air, water, and soil. 7Aeir program vill also include col-
)
lecting (1) annoal samples of natu a; vegetation at each of their 10 air sampling stations at the end of the growing season, (2) samples g
}.
twice during the Growin6 season of edible portions of food and feed n
crops, (3) semiannual samples of Missouri River bottom sediment, (k) two fish of commercial size semiannually at each of two river loca-tions, (5) two rabbits annually from locations 1/2 to 3 miles north-northwest and south-southwest of the plant, and (6) quarterly milk samples of four milk producers vithin a radius of 10 miles of the plant.
NPPD indicated that it vill present the results of these sampling programs in 3 quarterly reports and one annual summary report.
7ne analyces vill be statistically evaluated and compared with data gathered by the PHS.
Their reports vill be furnished to the required state and federal agencies.
(L) Education of People in Area.
In order to make information on the Cooper Station availabic to the general public in the locale, the AEC has furnished pertinent documents for a reading room at the Auburn Public i
b
.)
pe,
't k
si
-)
Mrs. Jeff Broady ]2 v V *f.n, October 29, 1971 rr a %d fenac re ye <
Lib'rary, 111815th Street, Auburn, Nebraska, 65305 Yoa may contact the librarian, Mrs.-Menc-+%M s, for further information.
Another source of information is Nebraska Pover.
You :sy vish to have repre-sentatives of NPPD come and speak to your tovn nectingo, PTA, clubs, etc., on tcpics st ggested by local c1tizens. If :.here is a hearing by the Atomic Saff ty and Licerein6 Board when the AZO censiders NPPD's opertaing licenst.ipplication, then this vill provide another op-portunity to obtain detailed information.
I a. asking the AEC to ad-vise you if one is held.
i (5) Dose to Child.
I am not familiar with the document, "Public Health Evaluation of the Cooper Nuclear Station."
(1.muld like to get e.
copy if you can tell me where one r.ay be obtainei. '. Dose estinates in that do:e.ent should be compared with those in the ER and DS.
The dose estimm e you cited (0.5 rem /yr) to a one-ye;r-old child is exces-sive, particularly in view of the isEC rules pr:;csed for the Co;;ie of
, Federal Rei lations, Part 50, Appendix I,(Atta:hment 1. ).
Following the requirencmts of this regulation, " increases in rt.diation exposures to individui.1 members of the public living at the site boundary, due to radioactive material in eithtc liquid or Gaaecus effluents from operation of light-vater-cooled nuclear power reactors at the site, vill generally be less than 0.005 rem /yr and aw rage exposures to sizeable pcpulation groups will generally be itse than 0.001 rem /yr.
Nevertheless, the guides provide that the Commission may specify, as design oy ectives, quantities and concentrations of radioactive materini aboyc bangrouns in either liquid or gaseous eff.uents to be released to unrestricted areas that are lover than the specified quantitica and k
concentrations if it appears that for a partic.:,lar site the specified quantities and concentrations are likely to result in ant.usl exposures uo an individual that vould exceed 0.005 rem /yr "
i NP?D in any event must comply with the AEC rere.1ations governing radio-logical releases and exposures.
l (6) Doses ang Radiation Dissipation Factor.
Again ycu should refer to the F,R and DS for the specific dose estimates in you-area. As for the dissipation fsetor, the value (1.8) that you gave seems reasonable.
The acturil value may be slightly lar6er (2.0 to 2.5) if one takes credit for all horizontal and vertical dispersion and radioactive decay.
(7) Cesium _-137 in Milk _.
The number you quote from "Poiso.ned Power," should be checked against values given in the ER and OS.
Our calculations indicate that 1 pCi of 137':s ingested by an adult yields a total-body dose of approximately 0.05 rem.
For a child the value vould be about double (0.10 rem /pCi). The dose of 7 rads, that you cite, for one day of exposure vould require an intake of 70 pCi; I find such an intake estimate difficult to believe.
Monitoring experience reported for Dresden gives a rang'e of 7.0 - 131 pci/ liter (there are 1,000,000 poi l '7Cs content of milk obtainci from dairies in 'the in 1 pCi) for the vicinity of the reactor.
[ Reference " Radiological Surveillance Studies 1
O a
3,
(
(
fes, Jeff Broady
-L-October 29, 1971 at a Boiling Water Nuclear Pov"r Reactor," 3. Kahn et al., Public health Service Report BRE/ DER-70-1 (1971).) Furthermore, Kahn 137 succented that most of the Cs reported for the railk monitoring program probably ori inated in fallout from atmospheric atomic 6
veapons testing and not from nuclear power plant operations.
( 8)
Cancer Death _s_.
I am nct certain as to the origin of figures you cite on a possib'^ 305 increase in cancer deaths and a 50% increased chance of Genetic damage to children.
If-they are from Drs. Oorc.an and Tamplin, then they are probably based on the assumption that every member of ;he population vill receive 170 mrem of additional radiation dose as a result of the effluents from nuclear power statient.
Re-gardless of the effect of such doses, it is difficult to imagine that doses of this level e.ll ever become necessary or attainable; nor vould they be permittei, particularly in view of the proposed 10 CTR 50 Appendix 1 (sce At achment L),
They were uncttainable even under the earlier guidelines since the maximum dose to those in the vicinity of a nuclear facility would have far exceeded the dose limit in order for the average for the populatica to reach 170 mrem /yr.
't Villiam D. Ruckelshaus, Administrator of E?A, in -testimony before the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy of the U.S. Congress in June 1971, said that "the theoretical risk of increase in cancers can be esti-matti for any givoa number of man-rens.
---the theoretical increase is one cancer per 7000 man-rem"(1 man-rem per year is the result of 1000 people receivin6 an exposure of 0.001 rem /yr of radiation). The estimated total exposure from nuclear power piants is a omall fraction of the estimated total exposure received from natural background radi-
)
ation or from medical diagnostic x-rays.
Using U.S. population ex-l-
posures for 1970, cne vould estimate LOOO cancers from natural back-ground, 2500 cancers from medical x-rays, and 0.05 cancers from nuclear power.
I
( 9) Contaminated Beef. The DS vill address the point you raise on possible conten. nation of beef cattle.
Clearly, this is an exposure pathway t
of possible Amportance, but one that we believe vill be of indiscernable i
impact.
I
}
(10) A11edced 'Elue Sky" T.esigns.
Nucicar power plants are not based on 1-design and wishful thinking. Rather the industry follows ri id G
quality ausurance stamicrds and practices. The AEC has established criteria t. hat govern desian, operating conditions, reliability re-quirementa, expected lifetimes, and maintenance programs for the plants.
Cbere are detailed technical requirements for designing, en6 neerin6.
1 proof testin6, and operating these plants. To insure that the criteria are met, the AEC Division of Compliance maintains extensive reviews,
surveillance, inspections and audits.
f Fes Jeff Broady I
- October 29, 1971 (11) Operator Competence and Radionuclide Releases. We have no basis on which to judge the competence of the operators at the reactors you-cited.
Ib~ aver, the oporntors must meet AEC licensing requirements and the rmlionuclides releases must be within AEC limito.
The operating engineers at Dresden i have maintained the level of emission vell below the permissible limit which is imposed by the AEC. The engineers at Elk River also complied with the regulations on the release of radioactivity.
("he Elk River Plant was a develop-mental plant and is no longer in operation. ) A copy of the 3e6ula-tiens on emissions (10 C75 20, Attschment Si is being sent fcr your information.
- n addition, vc arc sending (,1- ; &chment 6) tabulations i
of the radioactivity releases of U.S. nuclear power plants fcr the years
- 967,1968,1969, and 1970 As you can see'. the releases were vell within the limits and in most cases, less than 1% of the permis-sible level.
In the past year, additional restrictions have been imposed and the nuclear plants are nov in the process of installing additional equip-ment to reduce the level of release to t?) lovest practical level.
With recaro
,a the qualifications cf the operating engineers,-there are also federal regulations imposed on the qualifications of personne'.
i vho will be operating any nuclear reactor. Generally, the regulations (10 CF3 55, Attachment ?). require a minimum of 2 years of training to become an operator.
For superviscry personnel, the training program may be as long as 5-10 years.
In aidition, the operators must pass l
both vritten and oral examinatiens which are both con.prehensive and require 2-3 days to complete.
The cperator licensin6 branch of AEC
(
recently compiled the data on examination results between 1960 and
[
1970 (Attachment 3) which clearly shova that license denials have been I
made for those considered unqualified - in fact, the denial rate has i
been as hi h as 215.
6 I am also sending for your information copies of selected pages taken from the Cooper Station Safety Analysis Report (Attachment 9), which I'
shovs the (a) organization and responsibility, and (b) the personnel-qualifications and training.
1 It is also important to recognize that these plents are quite auto-mated and that many important control and safety functions are preset electronically so that they are carried out without any manual action The desi ners provide redundant (duplicate, triplieste, j
being necessary.-
6 etc.) circuits to ensure a high level of reliability for the most-y important-functions.
(12) Cunulative Done.
On the subject of cumulative dose I vill quote from l
Publication 9 of the Internaticnal Commission on Radiological Protec-l tion "As the existence of a threshold dose is unknown, it has been assumed that even.the smaller; doses involve a proportionately small 1'
l i
/
A f October 29, 1971 Mrs. Jett Broady risk or induction of mr611cnancies.
Also, because cf the 3sek of knowled e of the nature of the dose-effect relationshir the indue-6 tion of :Ali;n..cf ;s in nt n, particularly at tho,c d
.s els which are relevant in radiolacieni protection, the Commiss' no practical alternative, for the parposes of radiologica, p.w..ction, to assuminc t lir.chr relationship between dose Lnd effect, Lnd that doset act cun.ulatively.
The Commissior is avtre th6t the '.sr.umptions of no threshold and of complete additivity of all doses may be in-correct, but is satisfied that they nre unlikely to lead to the under-estimatien of risks.
Information is not available at the present time vid cn vculd lead to any haternative hypothesis."
t (13)
Pack rrra Radiation.
I do not kr.tv vhat the bac)cround radiation t
level is in your area.
However, the averace it, the U.S. 15 about 130 area /yr from ceneral backc/ourd radiation sour:es plus an aversce of e
about ;" ex*m/yr fre,n roan's u e of radiation independent of nuclear pove.
Tr. a latter is principt 1y due to medical diacnostic y.-rays, Addin T. 3 two figures, we fin 6 that the annual aversce per capath 4
doec t: :r.e population is about 220 mrea/yr.
l (ll. ) seewiry_ :>f Drs. Ooft an uno ?nm?l.n.
You suggest that Drs. Gofman and i
Camplir. s'aculd be provec vrong before Cooper operates.
It it a
'i ffi c21: if not impor.sible tat'.t to prove thea vrong on the b6 sis of ir.forst: ion currec.tly available.
On this r.atter, I vill quote from Report 3:. 39 of the ::atior.a1 Council on Radiation Prctection and Measuremar.ts "tne difficulties of obtLir.inc i:.Jormation at lov 6cces tre due r.ninly to the extremely lov frequer.cy vith which effects might oc:ar. 7ne task of obtainin6 satisfactory quantitative informa-f tior, is handicapped by the formidable statir.tical problems presented nnd tne impractica'oility of designing experimer.ts ir. which the prob-l tibility cf a demonstrable effect may be in the range of one in 100,000 to or.e in a million."
For the shme reasons it is equally difficult for Gofman and Tamplin to prove that they are right.
More importantly, their projections are based cn radiatior. dcses nearly two orders of magnitude Greater than most experts estimate vill actually occur at any time in the foresce-r.ble future (see item 5).
t (15) Desict. Speci fi c a tions.
See item 10.
(16) 1ppor:sn e of Your Area.
Due to your being a vital part of our countries farm cel; ana for many other reasons, ve feel sure that the AEC and EPA recognize the importance of the area.
I nppreciate hriving the opportunity to furnish you this small amount of in-formtstior, on the enviror. mental impact of the Cooper Station and I hope that it vill be of some benefit to you.
You can, of course, expect to find much.
more specific information in the environmental reports to which I have refer-red frequer.cly.
/
(
(
October 29,1971 Mrs. Jeff Broady.
Nvecanbeoffurtherassistancetoyou,pleasedonothesitateto
{
contact us.
Sincerely yours, fk A & k.c &
,o i
J. R. Buchanan, Assistant Director Nucicar Safety Information Center f
JRBijb cca W. B. Cottrell P. S. Bor.ver T. H. Eov e
l i
l t
T
'l
}.
.I r
't 6
5
+
e e
/
/.
e,
(
o Brownville, Nebraska l
November 2, 1971 s
near Mr. Buchanan, Thank your for your 1ctter, you e,e very courteous.
I will appreciate the material thet I have and will receive.
This in an important change in the attitude of the AEC, I've been treated 11,ke the bubinuon at Cooper was none of my businuos, and this not right.
It is very much my businers when *ooper will release radioactivity j
into the air I breathe, en enter the food I eat.
Here are my coinmunts to your cor:.r.unts.
(1). Cooper Stntion Powar Commitments - SC% of the output to go to Icwo Power nnel Light Jilinois E e tria, 30% under OPTION to the nome,,
i 12% in Nebronka - I realize that you are not interested in state busi like threat of stata condemnntion, tax subsidios etc but this is p
ruolly a bit raw.
F (2) Site nelection, everybcdy forgets that this is cattle fcnding cour i
j Thin fact has not even been mentioned, or the extent of the cattle-g just acions the river into Missouri and Iown where the effluents,fror:
Coopur will go.
I I now quote from " Radiological Surveillance Studies ut a Boiling Watt!
l Nocinnr Power Reoctor" DHR/ DER 1, pg 80 "Radionuclide analysen of the meat from buof cattle that had b.en on
)
ure near nucient power stations would also'be desircobin" l
k'h o r o o r n those studies ?
S u r e.' y they have been made. How abcut 40m studierE of beef cattle in the vicinity of ELK RIVCR 7 pg_139 nr POISOfJCD POWER
" Cosiun 137 in the air near thu power plu will deposit on nearby pasturen.
This milk will be gre. ed Ly coes nnd thif coslum 137 in their milk will eventually be connumed by chi).
If we n11nw 1.ho permitted luvol of cesium 137 concentration in the o f ca jm.t one day, a child consuning onn 11 tor of milk overy day will a body done o f se> von rada n A a consequence of just one. clay' r, **posua
/
l..
concerned chout radioq 'ivu indino, Gofmen end T h. Public Hu14
+ i t, Te.iplin arn concerncd nbout cernion, I don't like the idna of breathing
'andI'mroutethunonrohunta tritium and drinking triated wotus i
+
few of the f.vh!. ltnc eti t o C oino f ruf'I Cooper.
(3)
Environncntal monitoring.
Suroly you ca*not bulcive that either I;IfD or the AEC bbnuld r.ionitor Cooper 7 They havn too nuch to guin by not telling us tha truth.
(4)
Education of the People in the Area - Go to the city library',
tin.cs that of thn library and I didn't got i
ridiculoud, my fiin is six r.e t.. rial f i. <. f r om I'.' r> D.
i Nnbady kncas for.curo how a.uch ef f.i aunt release will come from Cooper, b,seaucc nrhuny known how many fuci olen.cnts will 2nak.
All cr.timstud-rd onne orn r.ndn undnr the annunption that this plant will
- i. f f l. n n t nnd this icn't possible.
W rk up tc design specifications, "Public Ho.,3th Evaluation of the Cooper Nuc.i nr s
'o.o te child.
( e, )
J
>, tion'
- T 1 - Nuclu,.t facilities section, Environmental i
National Conter for psdiological Surveillo u and Cont 2 ol Progthm, of Hoolth Education nnd Kolfare, Rockvillo, Md.
Health, G it j
dann estimaten with the ER and DL, I.i,t I woulti i n c. cod like to comparo l
I understar..I thny are not availablo en yet.
Hero I got-the'uncontrol hide this report'and l
to say that if you do not lika onu' report, uige writu unother on that you do approve of.
I If doses of radintion-factors -
(6) Doni r, und radiation dinuipatiori t
- hould even ho felt 100 milos away, et any of our high from Cooper cantors, and this dissipation factor will. dissipate at 6n population f actcr of 2 - 2y, figure this problem put for me, please.
'inversu Decouse,Mr. Duchunun I don't liku the answer I get.
(7) Already discussed.
from Gofman and Tamplin.
(0) Cancer deathn.
My quote was of courau
?
m
from(.sueleer Lo foty", pg /.50 - {
1.voto now Int un considor the donu limitution of 170 mrums/yr to the gennral population, that is the "p.>rminsiblu" done level with which Gofme,n and Tionplin taku 1:, t.u e.
Theru appears to ho no ranson to assumu ICRP factors for computing offects orn not pruoently conservativ q
and on thn banis of these factorn, it must be concluded that 20,000
" d e,a t. h s" / y u - r in the United States are due to natural sourcos ( you say 4,000) ond that 20,000 or so "dunths" can be contributed to I
dingnostic X-rnys(once wn reach equilibrium generations). (you say 2,;00),
3 Thnrefore is it were possible to givn uvoryone of our 200 millicn peopin on additional 170.mrems/yr by exposure to nuclear power ef fluer wn would estimate on the namn besin for thn equilibrium gonnretion that this done would produce somo 30,000 deaths per year."('you say 0.05 cancers.)
I f
This la from your own c.agazine.
If Drs. Gofman enam right about cancer' deaths, could they not be right about genetic mutations 7 from the Congrussional Record - Oct. 15, 1971 - Senute.
"The NCRP has steadfastly refuned to rovnol it's death and deformity' estimates which correspond to the permissible dose it recommended."
i i
J9 Contaminatno heef.
"Indiscrenable impact, we beleive."
--- onu
'i f
moment, please.
This is cattle country, naybu you should KNOW.
1
- 10 A11 edged Blue Sky designs.
How many of thnse plants havn actually been buried ?
How many of them do not operate up to design ~ specificati :
as to radiation lenkage 7 Why always mention Dresden 1, how about Humboldt Bay 7
' +
1 f la nparator Competence and Radionuclide Releases -
Elk River was a developmento) plant 7 Hellem was the sann 7 Will Cooper be a develop-!
montal p3nat too ?
You are stretching my extdolousness here.
% dM, I know a doctor who has hed nine years of study that I wouldn't allow t touch me with a surgeons knifn.
I happen to have talked to many a man t r o..m Gpw
/
.,,, i,
s
/
s g
l J
and the only man I had any respect for from Cooper told me "Mrs.
' Broady, get out of there".
(10) Background radiation - Here it has to bo in the 80 mrm/ year area.
(14) Accureicy of Gofman and Templin this puts un in a otrange position that you are not in, if they are right, where we live we are very cold corpses, c
t (15)
A (16)
I wish to say hnre that I do not think that you shou 3d have the right to decide whether or not our area is important. This is our hosiness, not yours or the prejudiend mon from Weshington.
And you do not have the moral right to decide whether my children v
should be irradiated with ANY todiation, until you can prove that
,{
it will not dentroy them and our future gennrationn And I do not like what in happenin; with Conniken.
g' i
Dut I do thank you for listening.
g 1
s i n c e r c,l y,
6 b,l <!
- 4' f
Mrs. Jet,/
/
. Broady 4
i k
-t t
4 4
e t
8 4
l e
4 y
ww-w-
-y
,..yw.
=
em..
re.,-
-, - - + -.. -,,
,~,,w,c-,,w-e,m.--c.w,r-.-
-.,,7,
,-.w.,,,...m.
.,_.-m
_,my.,
.re, s
...-c..,-e
Nov oinh n t 24, 1971
(
3 Dr. Jmicn Schluninger,
' Canirman, stonic Cnurgy Commincion
'onhington, n. C.
Dont Dr. L e hl u s i n r) e r,
I havu correnpontico with the ACC before on thu hubjuct of the Cooper f.ucluar btntion in rny back yard.
I havu n1 whys had th'n t
feeling that the ACC concidort, enyone who liVCH Sport from t.ashington to have this intelligence of a tun your old child.
\\0 havo ren, leoonthhip in Ununington ncsw, I will try again.
wu fuoc cattle corn wo grow on our own form - 300 To be i. r i ni,
or.rur cf which lies within the normal boundary lines of 4hn unner conciruction b'utwoon Chicago and Los J a r g t:n t DWii plent now Angtlen, the Conpur Nucin.r btation.
Our food yarda are 1/2 mile j
down,winc the dinpurnal stack, be arn Gnall, b I wu are ontr farm anong n6ny, but w., feud out f rom 5-10 million pounda of buof per year.
Thas in cattle country, this 10 corn econorny. Wu oro not nn eroa of "no importance".
1.u have not one et.nt allocated for utntu inonitoring.
l
'..ith the nerges of lowa Powur ano t ight with Illinoin f.' A c ctric,
thn ponnibl.Lity of almost all of tnu powor genuratud fion Coopur will go cont, there is another tjinnt p.Lant planned for Cooper.
Du havu Public Pows.r in thibracho, this creatus a tax climate for i
t h o tus power componics that would indicatu all efforts will be moot to occomplish the oojectives of huge power companian in the unut.
d Am I s.rong in r,nying that w t, c n.ino t tako A chanco of radioactivo uptake in our beef 7 la at not 1.ruu that cattle ahcorb radionueli-ann can pass thorn on to man, particularly when corn also absorbs this 7 M6>/,,
" Design apacificationb", "intim ted releasus"
" w e ho3<t7 t u x p e c t 3
~
Q
Of M m t k u 00v 00.W in (tttW h 10 lina.o wordn havo no muenang $n tun.
nur unvironment.
1)u t hrow thur.npoiuannoutinja duaibur.ituly4 t
I am wonduring whether ongineers anu s.:inntiotti havo yet colved
.tni. prouloma of rouintion luokagn?
All th.h pannin Acak rnolation.
Ilow ct.n einyono geromano dn that s
Cnop..r n 's ul t.o 1...s k ?
iiui..o r *. A oin pl a nt..orkuin in t h a t, m no I,ny that Coupi.x au n " mons".
l i n it.o k u u i..u nurvous, becduse h.re as thu d' f f urunce but. :on lif e and docth for my f 6mily.
" v ovi; c honi ti...v nlu.. tion o f the Coopur hucloor htntion" - ouyt.
600 ra min /yr to our childron who drink our inilk, within a 15 - 20 like Drdbdt.n 1.
131 1 Coupor opuratuD ti.i l u lbJAuc of COOpur.
1 i
-ACC logol limits 500 mrumo/yr.
7 I'
) '-/ # ' " '
n.".C unyn 5 mrera/ yr.
Ii Cooper can be felt 20 milen hway ut thu 500 mrums/yr lovi.1, to:
20 (milus) x 2 (diccipation factor) x 500 mrt maken ou:c luvni r.o r u l
Inst mu..us 20,L00 mrums, nnd notuing has yut ocun cela about ony of thu uths:r 200 ratilonuclides that will be released from Cooper.
ur. Dcniiuinger, that u.a k n s f or " D Ch'i H V nLL t.Y",
You wlal havo to ud. oil, t h h1. thuro in quito a difinrent ntury t o., i is being 1.ulo by snos. holding upponing viewn on this subjuc' Anu oi c o u i r.n i or. conc ernr.o, 1.nis is thn dii ference betwr.nn i
aitn und d u es t n.
/
nincerelygl Ore<'l*~
o c'. a 8.ioTf Tiroody p.s.
I don' t eve.n lik o to harbor the thought thtet our food will transmit donth to othern.
Coopur will nonitor....
Coopor 7 Do you talk to Cooper 7
.