ML20128B262

Responds to Re DE Gilbert Concern on Present AEC Radiation Protection Stds & Operation of Plant

ML20128B262
Person / Time
Site:	Monticello
Issue date:	03/22/1971
From:	Price H US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To:	Muskie E SENATE
Shared Package
ML20128B264	List: ML20128B262 ML20128B276
References
NUDOCS 9212030611
Download: ML20128B262 (2)

Text

_ . - _

4

, i

• o s ypp i 213I\

Docket No. 50-263  !

Honorabla Edmund S. Muskie i thalted States Senate Dear Senator Huskie This is in response to your January 21, 1971, referral of a letter from Mrs. Dorothy E. Gilbert pertaining to present AEC radiation protection ]

standards and operation of the Monticello Nuclear Genetating Station by Northern States Power Company.

FLth respect to the Time magazine article, we understand that Dr. Gofman's estimates of increases in the incidence of diseases from roliation exposure are based ca the assusption that the total U. S. population receives an average population exposure of 170 millirens per year. As a practical matter, under the regulations of the AEC as they are applied in limiting levels of radioactivity in effluents from nuclear power plants, the average dose to the population could not exceed a very small fraction of 170 millirens per year.

Experience to date from some 13 operating nuclear power plants shows that radioactivity in water and air effluents from these plants have generally been kept at less than a few percent of the limits specified in AEC reEulations. Increases in radiation exposures to the public living in the near vicinity of typical plants have genatally been about 5 millirens per year or less above natural background tadiation exposures of about 100 millireme per year. ' Average exposures to the population living within a radius of 50 miles of these plants have been ,

and are expected to continue to be about 1/10,000 or less of the FRC guide of 170 millirene per year.

The f act that the Federal district court has ruled that Minnesota may not enforce ita own standards for releases of radioactivity from the Monticello facility and that Federal standards are exclusively applicable does not sean that the facility will discharge at the upper limit of AEC s t andards. The actual levels of radioactivity that will be released in ef fluents from Monticello will be much lover. The Monticello plant and its associated waste treatment systems are designed to keep radioactivity releases in effluents and resultant exposures to the public in the low ranges experienced with other operating nuclear power plants.

1

(

9212030611 710322 PDR ADOCK 05000263 H PDR .i

l. a

. . Honorable F,dtmund S. Huskie One of the major actions takan by the Cosuaission this last year was the publication on December 3,1970, of amendments to its regulations that v111 help to further assure that radioactivity in effluant releases is continued to be kept as low as practicable. The a:nendments improve the framework in 10 CFR Part 20 for assuring that reasonable efforts are made by all Connaission licensees to keep exposure to radiation and releases of radioactivity to effluents as low as practicable. They also specify in 10 CFR Part 50 design and operating requirements to minimise quantities of radioactivity in gassot.s and liquid effluents from nuclear power reactors.

i -

In regard to radiation standards, the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements recoatly completed a 10-year study on radiation protection standards. The results of this study are contained in its Report No. 39 issued in January of this year. As stated in the press release by the NCRP upon the release of the report "the results of the Council's 10-year study confirm the values presently utilized for governing long-term cumulative occupational exposure and exposure to the genera) public."

In response to Mrs. Gilbert's concern about the reports of high incidence of cancer and leukemia in southern Washington and northern Oregon stearning from operations at llanford, I am enclosing an article, " Oregon Halignancy Pattern and Radioisotope Storage," written by two employees of the National Cancer Institute. This report concludes with the statsament that "no evidence was found that persons living downstream from the Hanford Preserve or along the Pacific Coast of Oregon have had an excess risk of dearn from cancer in general or from leukemia in particular."

Sin'ca rely ,

'( stened ) Ham'J L Prica

!!arold L. Price Director of Regulation

Enclosures:

1. Public Ilealtn Reportr Article.

2. Ltr fm Mrs. Gilbert dtd 1/5/71 Distribution:

llLPrice GErtter (DR-3034)

PAMorris Congressional (2) 1 Sh r

3) REVISED AND RETYPED IN OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF REGULATION.

JHCook ^ "

• 1 DR OGC D AOCR omet> . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . _ . . . . ... .

su m m > . Cook;.nemierson.Eno.t ts 5Schur.. . lillrite.I .. -. . - . . . . . .... ... . .

"h" om > fS .. J/17/7L .3/10/71 ._.3/4?/71......3/#f71 n.,m m.m m.m u mm.m -mo . . - . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . .=p. kc a

i.. . . . _ _ , _ ~ . .s