ML20235D370

Summary of 630409 Meeting W/Us Public Health Service (Phs) in Germantown,Md Re Bodega Bay Reactor Project.Listed Questions Re Earthquake Design,Growth of Population,Environ Monitoring & Radioactivity in Human Food Raised by Phs

ML20235D370
Person / Time
Site:	05000000, Bodega Bay
Issue date:	04/17/1963
From:	Newell J US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To:	US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
Shared Package
ML20234A767	List: IA-85-665, Discusses Seismic Design of Nuclear Power Plants,Including Const of Nuclear Plants in Seismically Active Zones ML20234A761 ML20234A769 ML20234A792 ML20234A798 ML20234A803 ML20234A812 ML20234A816 ML20234A827 ML20234A830 ML20234A838 ML20234A841 ML20234A844 ML20234A847 ML20234A851 ML20234A855 ML20234A858 ML20234A861 ML20234A864 ML20234A868 ML20234A871 ML20234A874 ML20234A893 ML20234A896 ML20234A900 ML20234A911 ML20234A922 ML20234A929 ML20234A932 ML20234A937 ML20234A944 ML20234A956 ML20234A965 ML20234A968 ML20234A976 ML20234A984 ML20234A993 ML20234A996 ML20234A999 ML20234B005 ML20234B008 ML20234B023 ML20234B032 ML20234B035 ML20234B040 ML20234B062 ML20234B066 ML20234B076 ML20234B084 ML20234B098 ... further results
References
FOIA-85-665 NUDOCS 8709250205
Download: ML20235D370 (3)

Text

_ _ . ___---__-_ - _

't f, um/w Files April 17, 1963 J. F. Newell, Chief, Site-Environreental Branch, Division of Licensing & Regulation MEETING WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF USPHS CONCERNI!C BODECA RAY REACTOR PROJECT In accordance with a telephone conversation with Mr. Terrill '

on April 8, 1963, arrangements were made to discuss the Bodega Bay Reactor Freject with representatives of the USPHS Division i

of Radiological Realth on April 9,1963, at AEC Headquarters, Germantown.

The following individuals participated in the meeting

• EE.P,lif. USAEC J. C. Terrill Norman Watson Ralph Longacre Gerald F. Hadlock Mike Mecess John F. Newell I

J. J. Sabo l

Bruce Maxwell Mr. Terrill, spokesman for the USPHS group, indicated they had no problems with the proposal from the radiological health stand-point, but stated that the Division of Radiological ifaalth staff had developed several general questions concerning the I project which they wished to discuss based on their review of the material contained in the Hasards Si==nery Report. These questions were mainly in tuo areas and were concerned with the earthquake problem and the environmental safety implications of the plant with respect to the pimit surre.sadings. However, before

' indicating the mataste of PHS's questions, Mr. Terrill requested information concerning the status of the project review by the AEC in regard to the possible schedule for the hearing and com- t mancement of construction by the applicant. Mr. Terrill was advised that the project was to be considered by the ACRS on )

Thursday April 11, and the hearing schedule would depend on the results of the Ceummittee's review. It was stated that a hearian date sometime in late May or early June would be conceivable if the ACRS repot*,en the project was favorable. On the other hand, l

8709250205 851217 PDR FOIA FIRESTOB5-665 PDR .

W7. e9 MW*

• p M*W

• p fi- y p_Ae-- *4s' y m m-

• er " em Ip-

( .

u Files April 17, 1963 i

if the ACRS had reservations concerning the safety of the project at this time a date for a hearing could not be predicted.

Following the above discussten. Mr. Terrill stated that the following questions were raised by the FilS staff during review

, of the projects

1. Does the State of California have a requirement or a system (procedure) for evaluation of earthquake designs?

" We stated that we did notinow the extent to which any state or toesi agency in California might review earth-quake designs.

2. How certain is the AEC that the PG&E statements concerning their basis for earthquake design are correct. For example, I' can someone who has competence in the remotor field determine the maximum intensity of shock that the remeter system can safely withstand and can someone experienced in seismology i determine the maximum shock that could be espected at the plant.

These questions posed by the PHS were discussed in general terms and during the discussion we advised the PHS gzwup j that all of these questions raised by the PHS were under I active consideration by 01AR, and, of course, in addition, would be a part of the overall considerations during the j ACRS review of the project.

3, Has any group other than PG&E made a study of the probable growth of the population and land development in the general area surrounding the proposed reactor plant 7 t

l We stated that we knew of no studies of this nature for the Bodega area, but we had no reason to expect say rapid changes because of the reactor plant, although, of course, we could not predict when and where changes in populatten growth patterns might occur. Mr. Terrill mentioned that the entire Pacific Coastal area is developing and that eventually one might expect an increase in population in the Bodega ares

as well as elsewhere along the coast. '

4 Mr. Tlarrill stated that the preoperational Survey and Environmental Nattering should be carried out in cooperation with the California State Health Department. He stated that 1

l l

5i

1. .. __ 'i

4 Files April 17, 1963 the applicant should work closely in this regard with a Mr. Duffy, who is Chief of the Bureau of Foods in the State Health Department. He stated that data in this

regard "should be made available to all concerned in aufficient time before any hearings." We made no comument on this.

. 5. Mr. Terrill stated that he is contacting the State Health Department and the State Water Pollution Control agency and requesting their comments concerning this project, and he will provide these comments to us. Further, he stated that he was asking these two groups if there are any other official local or state groups that have direct interest in the project that should be contacted for casaments.

We did not coament on this.

6. In regard to PHS views concerning the possible introduction of radioactivity into the htanan food chain as a result of nuclear power plant operations, Mr. Terrill stated that thus far the contamination levels have been quite inconsequential.

Even the fall-out from nuclear weapons testing in the Pacific has caused no significant contamination of fish brought to this country. And further, although some food processors have installed radiation monitors in food assanbly 11 ass, the PHS has no requirement for such equipment and does not encourage the installation of such equipment.

E ces R. Lowenstein E. G. Case R. H. Bryan N. Watson Hadlock, Conner, OGC e

1

_ __ ___ . _ _ -.