ML20100F185
| ML20100F185 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 01/05/1965 |
| From: | Zenchelsky S AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| To: | Jensch S US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20100F143 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-95-389 NUDOCS 9602200300 | |
| Download: ML20100F185 (1) | |
Text
_
4 s.-.~___._...
l*
CC X3 NUMBER C~=
OU % FAC. 50-2)9 l
NEW JERSEY PU3LIC ECIENTISTS' COMMITTEE FOR F"~-"'- INFBPJfiATISN
/
f R?.CEtVED C.3 uC E n cy CDPMtssiOM 980 Sunset Road, P.T.
j; ', 7 k,I gg g p~,
New Brunswick, N. J. 08904 Janusry 5, 1965 CF?lCE 07
- f;n EXIMIER*
Samuel W. Jensch, Esquire Chairman, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Atomic Energy Commissior Washington, D. C. 20545
Dear Mr. Jensch:
Because we know that you are concerned with
'y matters of public health and safety in general, y
and particularly with the problems posed by the f
construction and operation of a nuclear power plant in Lacey Township, Ocean County, New Jerscy, we
{t rfh enclose a copy of a letter which we have sent to the Honorable Glen Seaborg, Chairman of the U. S.
Atomic Energy Commission.
We invite your examination of our comments to Dr. Seaborg and shall be grateful to receive your views on the subject.
Since our function is to inform the public on scientific matters of public interest, we welcome any suggestions which ray be helpful in furthering that end.
Sincerely yours,
.dupmTpuW7 Seymour T. Zenchelsky Vernon Bryson Co-Chairmen STZ: ems Enc.
to Y
Cb DOCKETED k
usAEC 9602200300 960129
^
j m7ms-s 4\\
rjggglj,j{pff PDR DEKOK95-389 V
e m ca JDR 07A.
/g
k i
h I
- n v
i 4-
$09 l
A New Jersey Scientists Committee for Public Information 980 Sunset Road, P. T., New Brunswick, N.J.
08904 t
-e January 5,1965 1
fD " h/[
i
-. Honorable Glenn T. Seaborg, Chairman U. S. Atomic Energy Commission i
Washington, D. C. 20545
Dear Dr. Seaborg:
h E
This letter is prompted by the decision of the Division of Reactor Licensing to grant a provisional construction J
permit for a nuclear power facility to the New Jersey Central Power and Light Company at Oyster Creek, Lacey Township, New Jersey.
As an independent group of scientists engaged in the translation of socially relevant technical matters for the public, we are disturbed by certain aspects of the decision and public hearing which preceded it. While we recognize that some of our concern stems from legislation under which the AEC operates-a matter beyond your immediate control -
we also have our doubts about the prudence exercised on the part of the Division of Reactor Licensing in discharging its i
responsibility under the law.
We,' therefore, wish to call to your attention certain details which we believe require further consideration by the Commission and perhaps by the relevant Congressional committees as well.
Our interest in these problems is not intended to be 4
presumptuous, but is related to our responsibility in. acting as one of over twenty independent groups throughout the nation with a membership of biologists, chemists, engineers and physicians
- whose purpose is the dissemination of scientific information.
Our present activities are largely concerned with potential environmental hazards, in common with other S.I. P.I. groups V
.(see enclosure).
g\\
^
~
2
...a.
On > ]% n,fac T n t.u m v i -
pa
- ^
~ ~. _, ~.....
.b y,-L f
y 7
a
,5 y -
,?
^ f
- f
=
'-l-l Honorable Glenn T. Seaborg January 5,.19'65
- 1 Upon reviewing the proceedings (Do'cket No. 50 - 219) to '
- date, we cannot fail to gain the impression that the public's concern with respect to safety is treated (whether actually so
. regarded by the AEC or not) as a nuisance to be dealt with as summarily as possible in order to expedite,the construction of a proposed facility. Otherwise, how can one explain the following
. facts:.
- 1.. Technical details regarding the proposed facility were made available to. interested parties only a short time in advance of the publip hearing.
{
~
2'.
Notices of the public hearing barely met the legal
-requireme'nts for publication rather than serving the function of informing the public at large in a meaningful way.
3.
Certain relevant documents are available to the public only at costs ranging from seventy dollars upward, as indicated in the December 3 letter from Harold Price to Senator Case.
4.
Objections of the State of New Jersey Department of Health were not included within the Initial Decision.
But it is not only on these questions that our impression rests, for the decision itself raises serious doubts about the proper consideration of the public's concern with matters of safety.
Thus, we find that a provisional construction permit was granted despite the fact that the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
".... is under the impression that newer and untested extrapolations of fuel element design are involved... " (page 30),
and despite the fact that "The initial power of, and hence the
. radioactivity' content of, this application is a significant increase over existing boiling water experience. " (page 30), and despite
'.the fact that "The general power level proposed and the secondary safety equipment, while not demonstrably unacceptable, leaves little margin for errors in either basic design, construction,
(
plant maintenance or operation. " (page 33).
L We find it extremely difficult to reconcile the technical findings of the Board with the decision reached and immeasurably more difficult to explain this action to the public in terms of a concern with its. safety;on the part of the AEC. For we read in
. the decision that ".'...unless the plant can be licensed for powers-
./Og t%..
.w-..
?..,,
- ~.,. _
d'N i
-e Nonorable Glenn T. Seaborg January 5,1965
~
[4 1-7 4
2 3
h higher than 1600 MW (t) it is not in the public interest to issue the provisional construction ~ permit' when the.small, but finite, extra
. potential hazards over conventional fossil fuel plants are l
considered. " (page 30), and that "In a notable and historic effort to g
j gain competitive nuclear power, especially in terms of $/KW capacity,
' the Board cannot help but gain the impression that the' numerator l
t has been reduced by: sharpening the considerations involving installed
- cafety provisions and similarly increasing th'e denominator. by pushing l
i t.he design power and power density to the upper limit of present
~
day prudence," if not beyond.... 'At.some point in the continued l
reduction in the secondary safety equipment costs and increasing l
power densitites the accumulation of the uncertainties prevents the j
attainment of the assurance of the findings on safety that the Board i
' must make" (page 32). Moreover, in response to the contention that
- "Both Jersey Central and the Staff are satisfied that, based on the l
i principal architectural features and engineering criteria described in the application, the proposed facility can be constructed and operated
-l I
'at the~ proposed location and at a power level of 1600 MW (t) without undue' risk to the health and safety cf the public. ", the Board found l
"... little in this record to support this definite a conclusion" (page 19).
. Thus it would appear that the decision to grant a provisional l
construction permit was made~despite the very serious reservations
' of the Board regarding the safety of the public. In fact, according j
to the Board itself, "We have considered denying the application and j
to permit Jersey Central to come forward with some other approach j
to this problem.. We have, however, selected the alternative procedure l
ns reflected in this Initial Decision in the belief that it is feasible l
cnd helpful to the participants. " (page 43). Since the general public l
l C.
had small opportunity to be classed as a participant, we must infer l
i that the " alternative procedure" was designed to be " feasible and l
helpful" to Jersey Central.
4 i
The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board made clear the fact that "It is the Board's opinion that too many substantial factors are unresolved to allow thb granting of an unqualified provisional construction permit. " (page 43), and it also made clear the fact that' "The legislative intent of providing hearings at this stage >of construction ond operating licenses was to provide the applicants with some _ degree l
4 T
Jef assurance that the use of an investment would not be later denied -
1 l
- when an operating license is sought. "_ (page 42). Thus we cannot escape l
~
t I
f f
I i
e h,
d
}
l
- ~ _ _. _ _. _ _ _ _
r h
Y" Hengrable Glenn T. Seaborg January 5,1965 3
A
^
}
I the conclusion that the Board, in encouraging a considerable financial-I i expenditure on the part of Jersey Central, is satisfied that all
' cutstanding questions on safety will be resolved in a satisfactory manner before operation commences. Yet we also observe that "...
i i
'the Board cannot help but speculate on the interaction of economics with future decisions whether to operate under marginal conditions.
Ao one example, a question was raised at the hearing as to whether j
the radiation protection engineer would have the authority to-close down the plant in the event of a nuclear radiation necessity determined by him, and the evidence reflects the hesitancy on the part of Jersey Central to invest him with that authority. With strong economic temptations likely present at all levels in the organization, the Board cannot fail but to take these factors into
(
cccount in its considerations of the total risk to the public. " (page 32).
In the light'of the above facts, is it possible for the public ct la' ge to feel reasonably assured that the Division of Reactor r
Licensing will stand steadfast on the questions of public safety in the face of its desire to be " helpful to the participants," especially when the participants have expended a significant fraction of the
$66.4 million estimated cost with consent of the AEC? We do not feel this assurance now and find it impossible, as a Scientists' Committee for Public Information, to convey such assurance to the public. It is clear to us, from these procee_ din @t the AEC faces a conflict of interest between itsToles as promoter of atomic power and arbiter of public safety.
We respectfully request that the Commissioners review i
the initial decision of the Division of Reactor Licensing in the light cf our comments above and provide the necessary assurance that the public safety will be adequately weighted in any future decisions on the Jersey Central Reactor. For our part, we shall be happy to convey such assurances to the public and to render whatever cosistance we can in the matter of public information.
Very truly yours, t[fM d-Seymour T. Zenchelsky, Ph. D.
Vernon Bryson, Ph. D.
Rutgers, The State University New Brunswick, 'New Jersey -
q l
o f
a 7
Sc1ENTISTS' INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION/
APRIL, l964
~
t-Loc,tl'comtnitrec news
'Phe NEW YORK committee, which is
}
i V)y,f;,
- ' changing its name to Scientists' Com-j l
mittee for Public Information, is ex-
-k i
0 panding the repertoire of its speaker's
[(h[ I hrfj,Ck bureau ta include a wide range of sub -
y-jects. Sarnple talks are being,given to membership meetmps for critical ex-f aminati:n. Suggested changes are re.
/
ferred to a subcommittee, which pre-pares a second sample lecture. When the
'*0'6 d *O" ln"e'm!'e!j S.I.P.I. to initiate public infOrmation programs
"'I"'a*'dicifnt 5 er n
have indicated willingness to participate. '
On prOblCmS O[ air, Water pollution and pCStiCidCS I
the topic is meluded in the list of avail-i abic Intures which is to be sent to 1,000 Qcientists' Institute for Public Informa-quences of a u o m a t i c production community groups. Sample lectures have U tion will focus primary attention (c.'
methods, relation of human heredity to i
been resented on automation by Dr.
the immediate future on problems of the development of society and popula.
- les firsch, race relations by Dr. Ruth environmental conservation. The Insti-tion control.
g
(,.. nnett, and population control by Dr. tute will develop nation. wide informa.
In attendance at the meeting were 18 Sheldon Siegel. Dr. Eugene Morrill is tion programs on air and water pollution of the 22 board members and observers preparmg a. talk on air po!!ution.... and the eHects of large. scale uses of from the Hartford, Montana, New Jer.
- The committee has moved its offices to pesticides and herbicides, to be added to sey, Philadelphia and Rochester science.
234 E.~47 St., N.Y.17. TE 2 7778.... its continuing prrwram on radiation.
information committees. Also attending WESTERN MONTANA ' Scientists' The decision was expressed in a policy as invited observers were U.S. Public
' Committee for Public Information, c/o resolution adopted unanimously at the Health Service officials. including Dr.
Dr. Otto Stem, Dept. of Botany, Mon
- annual meeting of the S.LP.L Executive Robert J. Anderson, Chief, Environ.
tana, State U., Missoula, Montana, is Board, on March 1314 at the Rocke-mental Health, and Vemon G. Mac.
seekmg support for feller Institute in New York. (Full text Kenzie, Chief, Air Pollution.
environmental contam,a symposium,onmation, mcludin6 is on p.3.) The resolution reflects a Dr. Anderson spoke of the need to radiation, air and water pollution and long. standing desire by the board to alert the scientific community and the group is also trymg to fmance an m,Theter. - expand the Institute's scope to include public to the dangers of pesticides, to be held in the fal!.
all forms of environmental contamina-in the environment. He cited the PHS daciplinary study on the socio. economic tion. Intense public concern over radia-as a source of information for the scien.
. effects of the Minuteman missile in-tion in the past necessarily led S.I.P.L tist to inform the public.
stallations around Great Falls. The in.
to concentrate on that contaminant. But Mr. MacKenzie deplored public ig-stallations were a great. boon to business the dwindling public interest in fallout norance on air po!!ution. Solution of
- mitially, but when the construction attending the test ban treaty enables the problem, he asserted, rests on the rkers and their famth,es oeparted. the science-information movement to participation of an informed citizenry.
o.any businesses were hopelessly over. broaden its concern.
He saw a responsibility for the scientist expanded....The Greater ST. LOUIS The board saw radiation and non.
to bring the issue to the public and to Ciuzens' Committee for Nuclear Infor-nuclear contamination as parts of the give ;;uidance to local public officials.
(cenii"a'd on p. 2) same social problem, which it described He cited the Clean Air Act of 1963, as a tendency to make large. scale techno-which gives assistance to communities A.ir pollut. lori workshop logical applications of scieue "without for pollution control, as an example of rphe - U.S. Public Health Service, adequate scientific knowledge of their positive federal action.
^ in cooperation with S.I.P.L. will eventual effect on the capability of the S.LP.L Associate Director Robert E.
hold a two. day workshop on air pol.
environment to support society." In Light. outlined a proposal for a public lution for scientists from local public directing attention to the hazards of information program on air pollution in inftrmation committees. Tentative technology, S.I.P.I. hopes to help reduce which S'.LP.L would encourage and help the limitations on the social benefits scientists in local committas, sponsor arrangements call for the workshop to be held on May 15 and 16 at The which can-be derived from science, national and regional conferences and Rockefeller Institute in New York.
"Thus," the board concluded, "the con-help provide fmancing for the local
.Purnose of the meeting is to dis.
servation of the environment is a matter groups. The program would employ russ the nature of the problem and of urgent attention for the scientist and PHS materials as well as the report of acquain: scientists with available data.
the public."
the AAAS Air Conservation Commis.
Emphasis will be on informal dis.
L The board also assigned other science-sion, but it would also develop its own cuaion. Ea'ch of the local groups will re:ated public issues for exploration and literature through the Nulcar In/cmu.
be invhed to send a representative.
devebpment of future programs,includ-tion bulletin. For this, the bui!ctin ing:rclationships between races, conse-(c,,;,,,4,,p,4) 109 i;
I