ML20127L923
| ML20127L923 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Monticello  |
| Issue date: | 07/22/1969 |
| From: | Karth J HOUSE OF REP. |
| To: | Seaborg G US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20127L868 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9211250306 | |
| Download: ML20127L923 (7) | |
Text
.
y. (
~.....
___.n_
//.,
.sostio c.uxnTu
- Tg.
. r,,.
Af te D.erset, MHNEt@f4 SCIENCC AldG A%IhQlsAUlfC3 toenisawAN. tw buMet1(t he 4
8 j
g' st'Atl* scludct ann J
1433 F44FtlumN HMC Cwrect Dentoiese a
Congregg of the tLhtitch States
^'~"~L
- * ~ " " "
NACA OVCl<StGit?
PC'EPT t'. I!C&S
..,3.,,u.....~t K)ottde of 3Acprcdtittalitted 4
COMM4TTg ( Oad j
MrftCilANT MA41NC ANC Ula@ingIon,D.C. 20515 i
n NwC.
.o.co.. ruc..
F14HCrtita AND WILDL.WC 5
July 22, 1969 counN m ion tusCOMMtTTEE ese 9
OCCANOGRAPHY SUSCOM64fT16# ON 1
i I
q Dr. Glenn T. fenborg, Chairman l
Atomic Encrt;y Comicsion
'Ja::hini; ton, D. C. 205h5 l
l 1
Dear Dr. Set:
bori;:
j
(
Encloacd 13 e copy of a letter frcn one of;y conclituents
]
who h;ppens to be President of the ::innesotn Envivenzntal Can'rcl
{
Citi::ent Coonell.
1
'Clile hi htter is scif-cnplanatory, I do iiog y:,u cri I strant y feci fr.t-l l
providt an:ciers to Mr. Gudler's questionr..
two months it sufficie:,', tice for t.he Atomic Encroy Cemission to 2
i forculize its a ply,
~
f l
- .r. Gndler u L recently rec opainted to the Minn::co'.a Pollution Control Scency thus hc Ea public.strtun.
I woul:1, c!' c: c.rae, appreciate enythir.c :..; can do t:
i.
5' satisfy his querics.
l I
1
'dith ber.t vic'r:, I et l
Vcr; tru y-ya rn, il -
/
e4 d 4
A Y //
lCV,LDf,%]
Q, 1
,(,,,,,y
},.- -
J cepc i,. Entth "cmr of Co crca:
EK:jc -
Encloraer I
4 '
R - 2272 9211250306 690912 1
PDR ADOCK 05000263 4
__ H _
PDR 4
.i
.-y-m, y.m.,-,,.
.,c,,,7,-7,,...-,,re-,w.,
e
,y-
.e em-.,,,-
Ju-u-(
le
. sqA MINNiiSOTA ENVIRO'Nh! ENTAL CONTROL CITIZliNS ASSOCI ATION MffRNMiVNMr44fM, saint Paul, Minnescia FM M :
Central Manor, 26 E. Exchange St. 55101 July 18, 1969 Congressman Joseph Karth j
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED' STATES j
Hoese of Representatives Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congreseman Karth:
On May 24 th I urote to Chairman Glen T. Scaborg of the United States I
Atomic Energy Commission submitting questions prepared by Mr. Steve Godler of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The questions concern the safety and operation of nuclear power plants and in particular the nuclear j
plant at Monticello which is now under construction.
I am also enclosing a copy of the letter from AEC dated June 17 th in lieu of providing answers to these important questions concerning the safety of our people and the integrity of our drinking water.
MECCA will appreciate your assistance in securing answers from the AEC to Mr. Gadler's questions. A copy of these questions is enclosed.
We recommend that when the AEC or any other governmental agency receives l
. direct questions from American citizens that it should be the policy of these agencies to furnish direct and relevant answers. They should certainly not l
furnish them reams of reference material without also providing understand-able ancuers, v'
Thank you for your help in this matter.
I Sincerely yours,
)
aA4*S'h
~~
n g3c Paul 11. Engs trom, President Minnesota Environmcntal Control Citizens Assoc.
PHE:dsg Encl.
l l
l l
l
-~.s.,
Apri.
W, JV6'/., h
~ aff
(
a o
L o
Menticello Uuclear Generating Plant Qucations Pertaining to the AEC (List //3) by Stovo J. Gadler, P.E.
- Mcaber of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 4
1 Since the health and. safety cf the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan popu-lation dcwn river and down vind frc: the ::onticello Nuclear Reactor p.'2.r.t is of concern, why did the AEC -
1 I
}
Approve the request, to build and Operate a reacter which acccedin; to a.
the USP Final Safety and Analysis Report has undeve2cpci ecaponents?
j b.
License the construction and operation of an experimental type cf reactor under the Research and Dcyclopment section of the Atomic Energy Act?
j i
1.
Is the Monticello site'or plant licensed? Or are both licenced?
Permit the discharge of radicactivo pollutants into the Mississippi c.
which is the scurce of drinking vater fcr apprcx'rately one third cf l
the people living in Minnesota and for the dcun river popular,iens ;c the gulf of Mexico and a source of water for industry and for agricultural irrigation?
d.
Fail to rake any plans to provide a source of inter supply for down t
river users in the event of a nuclear accident at Monticello which would destrcy the river as a scurce of drinkin,3 vator?
1:ot advise the USPHS that the Mississippi P.iver water ins use; f:,r e.
irrigation-down river from the Monticello plant?
f.
Overicoh pr:ducing complete and thrau,,,h stu'.ics on the teta' effect.
to the Mississippi River " alley ecclegical qstem from the centemp'2.tci l
radicactive taste discharses into the air End tator enviroreact.ts frca Monticello, Elk P.iver, Prairic Islar.d and other rcactorr.?
k i
g.
Ecglect to censidor the damage to the quality of the vater and to the river biota from the-thermal pollutants to be discharged frca Xonticello, Elk River, Prairie Island and cther being planned for this area?
v 2.
Since the public health is of concern what control will be imoosed on the operatcr by AEC -
. In event the plant is closed down be.cause of accident or obsolescence?
a.
i
\\
Page 1 Of 5
-~
9
=
April 30,196'/
(List //3) l
^-
{,
~
Mo'nticollo Huclear'Ocneratin5 Plant Questions Pertaining to the AEC b.
For disposition of site, radioactive structuro and reactor after final closo down?
c., To prevent abandonment in order to protect the public interest?
{
'd,
To decontaminate and control area _as long as necessary to protect the l
public health and safety?
39 i
3.,. The AEC literaturo indicates that many reactors such as Fermi, Pathfir.dct,
\\Piqua, Bonto, Hallum, Elk River, etc., have been closed and others such as "Dresden, Peach Bottom, Oyster Crcok, etc., have experienced difficulties
'due to many factors such as equipment failures, deterioration of notal,. which has resulted in unschedtded radioactivo uasto releases to the enviror acnt.
It
'therefore appears that the reactors are still in various stages of research e-f,.
and development and that a]l the recessary experimental work has not been
'.S.
accemplished and in view of these salient facts affecting the health and safety of all Americans, why did AEC not -
-k Conduct and compicte all research and development work to develop a a.
i reactor technology before -
I 1.
Imposirs experimental nuclear plants on the economy?
2.
Exposing American citizens to the risks of ionizing radiation from the radioactive waste discharged to the environment from 4
these reactors?
b.
Disseminate complete'infornation to the public concerning -
1.
The present health and future risks 1.o the populaticn frca exposure to the radioactive wastos discharged into the environ-ment?
2.
Accidents and accidental discharges of radioactive wastcc from.
I reactors?
4 3.
Total amount of radioactive wastes being discharged to environ-t ment, to be discharacd, and the probable offects to hcalth?
c.
Close dcun reactors discharging radioactive wastes above AEC limits
~
rather than to permit operations when reactors woro experiencing difficulties?
d.
Develop positive and securo instrumentation and monitoring methods to insure complete and effective data concerning amounts of radioactive wastes diccharged to tho environment?
c.
Withdraw all operational licer.acs under the research and development ocction of the Atomic Energy Act?
Paso 2 of 5 e
r
-
y w
w
~kpe,u,ii'g3) J
~~ - --- - --
.-e
..o HG (1.ist
,' Monticello huclear Ocn hingP3antQuestionaPortaini
.,o the AEC Providocomplete!plansforostablishing-f.
]
1.
Alert 'urning notuorks?
. Adequato mod'fcal facilitics and evacuation procedures in the event 2,
of a nuclear accident?
5 3
1 The Sacramento Municipal Utility District plant is designed by Westinghouse I
to elininate the discharge of any radioactivity to the 1.nter envir c.ncnt.
ll.. Mr. Seaborg, Chair.mn of the AEC in a speech to an Air Pollution Synposiun in K'ashington D. C. in 1967 said that the AEC is capable of designing phnts In view of the SMUD system and the Scaborg statement -
4 without smM:o stachs.
I l
~
llow nuch time will be necessary to develop a reactor plant that can a,
contain all radioactive mates?
What are these costs por megawatt of electric pcuor produced?
i f
b.
What is the anount of radicactive mstes produced per megawatt of j
olectric power in a N.4 type p2Lnt of the Monticello size?
c.
a The literature indicates that the AEC hr s remitted all nuclear reactors to j
discharge tritiu: substantially above Icvel permitted for other radicactive l 5.
wastes, why does AEC -
4 Permit tritium dischargos to the environment?
a.
Only utilice estimtes instead of accurate on-line measurements for b.
tritium discharges frcm reactors?
Why has USPHS recent]y established a tritium monitoring.cw rk?
l
/
c.
According to informtion released by AEC, it appears hold up tanks will be i
t 6.
utilized at the Monticello clant to meet the requirements of tk limitations In event of an inversion which should preclude dis-imposed by 10 CFR 20.
i charge of radioactivo wastes to the atacophore -
Khat action can be taken by plant cperators if tanks are already full when inversion occurs and more radioactive gaseous wastes must be a.
handled?
Will plant be closed down under these conditions?
b.
Are tanks at Monticello of sufficient capacity to hold up all gaseous N,','
radioactive wastes under adverse conditions to protect the public health
. c.
4 and safety?
- d. 'What will be done with wastes produced during shut down if tanks are W
~
full?-
Page 3 of 5 1,
~
. --.m.e..
"1"(((gg"j))'*<
j
'llof1' ice 31o !!uelcaf'encrating P3 ant Qucot, ions Porg J.ing to the AEC 7.
According to AEC if ' excessively high radiation icycls aro detected during-periods when radioactivo gasos are hc3d up from discharge to environment or if unfavorable weather conditions prevail, release to tho atmosphere will probably not be able to moet conditions of 30 CPn 20.
- a. ' In such an event does AEC advocate violation of its own regulationc?
1 What are tho possiblo courses of action and recommendations to avoid b.
the discharges under the conditions set forth in item 7 aboyc?
k.
The Advisory Cennittee on Reactor Safeguards of the Atomic Energy Commission 8.
by letter to Chairman Scaborg dated April '13,1967 recom=cnded -
Stress analysis report for the reactor vessel be reviewed by indo. pen-a.
dont experts since this is the first Nuclear plant to use a field welded and erected pressure vessel, a procedure new to _the industry.
l b.
That the AEC Regulatory staff satisfy itself with respect to the cde-quacy of the isolation valve test program and follow the development
)l of the detailed design since in the event of a steam 3ine rupturc external to the reactor containment the steam line isolaticn valves must close rapidly.
That NSP provide supplementary facilities for retention of radicactive 1
c.
vastes during periods of low river flow since during periods when cooling tower are utilized for recirculation of condenser cooling ster the volume of discharge water into which the radicactive wastes can he di-luted will be greatly reduced.
In view of the importance of the above items to the health and safety of t
the public, detailed inforcation should be presented to the Agency cn the status and results of the ACRS Cc tittee's 'reco= endations?
I l
The Konticello Unit El design incorporated at least 12 features (itemized en 9.
page 16 of Partial Summary of the Facility Description and Safety AnalysisAll Report) which have not yet been demonstrated in reactor plant operation.
of those itens were reviewed by the AEC Staff and the Advisory Committee for Reactor Safeguards, however since these important safety featurcs which concern health and safety were only revicwed and not approved cotalled infor-mation must be presented to the Agency showing -
Where and when the listed itens were fourA approvable and capabic of a.
meeting all safety requirc:ents to protect the health and safety of the public?
b.
Reco==endations as to the possibility of safe operation of_ these items which are new features and have not previously been operated in EWR reactors, without undue risk to health and safety of the public?:
Page 4 of 5 k
(
rm - -
" { ^ *^~~
April 30,1969 (List //3) t.
m, i
!!onticello Nucles. Generating Plant Quostions Pertaining to the AEC o
Of the 12 listed items, which items havo been complotoly developed c.
and' approved for_ use at 1:enticello by the AEC Staff and the Advisory Co.cnittee on Reactor Safeguards? When and by whom approved?
d., Of ror.aining ites needing approval how many roquire additional re-scarch and development?
e.
What is estimated approval date?
..'?
f.
What are recc.mondations on operating the plant without AEC approval of all tho tested and necessary engineeral safeguards?
+
t I
R k
l 1
t
{
6 5
v 1,
Page 5 of 5 o
,)
g
. c';,.
t i ^-
's -
- N.',-
.',(
i.
..I~*';
~
La-gg,
,,