ML19331B024

Forwards Correspondence W/Cederberg,Hart & Griffin Re Midland & Fermi-2 Unsafe Siting Per AEC Recent Guidelines. Requests Correspondence Be Placed in PDR

ML19331B024
Person / Time
Site:	Fermi, Midland
Issue date:	05/24/1974
From:	Sinclair M Saginaw Intervenor
To:	Engelhardt J US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
Shared Package
ML19331B021	List: ML19331B024
References
NUDOCS 8007250723
Download: ML19331B024 (16)

Text

.

(G J

5711 Sunnercet Drive Midland, Michigan 48e40 May 24,197+

Mr. Thomas Chief Engelhardt[n3 Counnel, Licenc Divicion Atonic Energy Cotniscion

• lachin.ston,

. D. C. 20000

Dear Sir:

I am enclocing a ceries of correspondence with Congres:-

man Cederberg, Senatora Hart and Griffin, nnd the Director of Information Servicec of the Atomic Cnergy Conciscion, John A.

Harric, on the matter of the uncafe citing of the Midland r.-

planto and the Fermi # 2 plant in Michigan, according to the most recent citing guidelines of the AEC.

Please place all of thic correcpondence in the dockets of the Midland and Fermi #2 n-plants in the Public Documente roca.

Please let me know if thece docunents will be cent to the public files for the Midland n-ple.nte in Midinnd and to the Fermi d2 files in Detroit.

Thank you for this cervice.

Sincerely, Mary 31nstair b

Enclocures V

. ' 'A 9

1 8007250 Q

1

~_

COPY 3711 gunnercet priye Midland, Michigan 43640 February 26, 1974 The Hon. Elford Cederberg U. S. House of Reprocentativec ilachington, D. C. 20000

Dear Congreaccan Cederberg:

I am bringing to your attention the tecticony that Ralph Under procented before the Joint Cocmittee on Atonic Energy January 23, 1974 In his testinony, Relph Under charges that tuo documents of immence it?crtance to the people of this state have been cupprecced. One ic a cafety report prepared October,1971 by an AIC Tack Force. The other uns a report on neu citing guido-11n=3 that listed Midland and Ferti #2 ac unsafely sited.

pleaee dacand that thece documente be releaced to the public at_once, r

In his testinor.7, Rolph Under nico pointo out the many araas of grave concern to public health, cafety and national cecurity in uhich the Atomic Energy Cornission and the Joint Comaittee on Atonic Energy have fail.ed in their responsibili-

ties. He pointo out that only through the efforta of indepen-l dent, public-cpirited Congreccuen, ccienticts and citicenc, have thoce serioua prob 1. ems been brought to public attention and come action begun on them.

Note the artic]c encloced on the Britich concerna over U. S. reactor cafety--and they renti: nave an energy cricis.

Sincerely, l

l Home addrecc: Mary Sinclair, Co-Director l Consolidated Matie.nal Intervenors 5711 sueneract Drive 153 "E" Street, S. E.

l Midland, Michigan a3640 'lachington,

. D. C. 20003 I

MS:sh Enclocures

~s

5711 summerset Drive Hid1'and, Michigan 43640 March 18, 1974 The Hon. Elford Cederberg U. S. House of Representatives Washington, D. C. 20000

Dear Mr. Cederberg:

The reports you sent me bear little or no relationship to the nunnresand docunents that Ralph Under cited in his testiuony before the Joint Coanittee on Atomic Energy on January 28, 1974 The reports ne vant are the original studies by AEC's Regulatory Staff on core conservative citing guicelines and the AEC Task Force direct observation account of their evaluation of the abnormal oc-currences at the operating reactors in the U. S. over a 17-month period. Excerpts of this report were sent you. Enclosed is a Nucl.oonica ' leek report (Hay 10, 1973) of the dore conservative popu-lation linitations recotaended by the Regulatory Staff.

These data cake both the Midland and Ferni p 2 plants unsafe in their 6iting, The sanitized and politicized reports yow sent ne in no uay reflect tae real hazards to public health anc safety that the studies by the Regulatory Staff on siting the Task Force Report on licensing prob 1cus have revealed.

InthecourceofresearchingmyhraduatethesisonNuclear Pouer Environnental Communications at the University of Michigan, I found a study by Stanford University called "The Politics of Tech-nology". They pointed out and documented the fact that the basic reports subaitted to government agencies by eminent consultants or by the conpetent people on their own staff s are inevitably "politi-cized" by the top bureaucracy to confora uith the vieus of the special economic interests they are appointed to cultivate.

Your many years in office convince me that you can't possibly be taken in by this " cover-up" nothod of bureaucratic performance that the documents you sent ne illustrate so nell.

This time the issues are deadly serious. We are asking for the oricinal studies, please.

Yours sincerely, Home address: Mary Sinclair, Co-Director 5711 "u==creet Drive Consolidated National Intervenors Midland, Michigan 153 "E" Street, 3 E.

48640 Washington, D. C. 20003

streno"At ccccn2cnc AP bh"NQOM

= =.7=". . - . . , .

=t" ;" - .

Cottgicds of tip Elitittb 6tates .-.?%"."C.

. - .u m

-.. - o.~.

, m n.,- .m JJouge of Representatilles  ? T'"

u m .*rm.

• "CJd l*" E21ssfjinaton,Di. 20515 ' " " " * " * " " ' " ' " ~ "

April 17, 1974 Ms. Mary Sinclair 5711 Summerset Drive Midland, Michigan 48640

Dear Mary:

I have received a reply from the Atomic Energy Commis-sion regarding the questions that you raised in your .uarch 18th letter to me. I hooe that the enclosures answer those cuestions to your satisfaction. The AEC has expressed to me a strong desire to fully' answer any other questions that you may have and they have assured me that they are not hiding or classifying any information that may be relevant to the construction of nucle r power plants.

Thank you for writing. I can appreciate your interest in this area. If I can be of further assistance in this or any other area concerning the Federal government, please feel free to contact me.

Sincerely yours, f M:^ n !? 2 - 3 EAC:lb Elford A. Cederberg Enclosures

)

• COS.Y~ ~ c-s..t +,1 .e<-. .- 0. w- e. . . * * -.... * .

a , - , .

.e.~ .u. .r ., .; , e ar h 3. .C. A.

s.m, .w.7.

e 3..

.o.., s 7 w, ig f."'1,. .p *** e w U.. O .. . . o . d C a c'. c..w h. o. u,

.q . ..tr,...e e

.J.

. C. .=.e. p.w a., a7.. . u3 ~. 4 . e e a

..C.,.we n o . . . .. , s.

. 3 w. . C. 2.e.O s r.ca .

s a

S O ..e~ a. '3 e .P.n.

. . Ce de %.e. c., ..

. dec.4ae d .o .a.0  :. ..:. a . . .e .n-. , . ~w .a u . . ~4 - n,. - . . w, 2,C . .. C...-. . O.

,.J m, . 1 o. 3 e, . . c . .a.. . --.,........./..n..,

4 ,.u e .c- ., .. .

. . . . . . - . . . . . . . n ~..%.. 1,. . . e of Mr JChn A. Ha ris (Cffice C' Inforr.ation Services O' the

.u: w ) ,..t,,,.,.g,,

, . O ..g.. 1. ...... . . , C .o 4.3.-

r- -

. .u. 47 ..i,..

'.A- p . *7.3.%.%.4 .e

. . .p.7 a. .=. a.g ..{. s.. .. .k. 4 a.b. w. A- ... . n. . . .a c. . .e .g .;.

. . . . .n u . A. e. 4 . 4 -.

3 .- 3

.k..a.d %. g n .e. e.

u .,3 n w. e e g e. d .a .. A,=.41 . .. .e... d t.'. . . g ,.' . a " C.

'. 3 .C '. g"*...". a"..".*."s.S.*...*.=

~...< -. e. a.

• 3 j-. .'.- 1. .e g ~. .s n.e. .a .. =~ g n. e...%. a.

ge 3.c,7)-

. .y...A- e. i g..n ~ . g O .e .c~ .L , ( h ,

g , e. . . p . g.,_,a. . .w.. aau . .w . a. d ys. . %.; ,,.4,. ..a w

. . ....t* e a... - a. .s.. .. L 4 o.g g ...,-

~

.~4.. . . . .

7."a.G"Cd #w0 """ e."4 . 3 ?

. . * ** S ." a. .' e .". .* .".g *^

.w.

4.p f o. .. < .% ,1 *--

s. .m. a. .e. 2.y . a. e. . .k.o.

. ...,...-..t.

.. ..w .. .w ." .~. .... .Nw. w. .. - .m. a. o .-.s-0 ".4 C.u ". ~., ~. .*. ^.,, ,~) S C .'

.'.Y.*.^.."'.'.***.~ ~

~. .k. . ' . " . . * ^ . " .

n. .' C C .". " * .~. . ". '. " . . * . * . . * . . ~ . * . . * . . * .

wa g p. 4.

. . . cd. . 3. .. .e. *..h a4 ,_,,* .. k g *. ueow . . 4 m,. e..fy. e .. #. g *o b g *. ;,.. g 1 f. .=. c- g a. I% a. g 4.a g a'. ....,

4 .* a. E t.w.o. eg u.. . . g- t - . g..g1 . u~ %. .jw . o m.. e. ,% 1 3 .~..a u... --

- ..s,.. . .h.e. ,p ....- 1 g e. w .a . .a . ,-

e g.e . .. gm m1 pe . ,y.. . . p .% ,.1 3 ..a

.

• e 4 ae 39 .e,.- *- a

• 7_ g .. , . .-. - , n...g.. .e. mo. d t'sg o. c., . a..g...f.

.n.- o. .. . ..1.1. s , ~. .L.a ....a. ** -1

, o.k..' .4 ~" C d. ." *. *. C ." '. CC"14 w w

. . O '. E.".d do e. G

.Ow Swa O . .x. 4 e Cl t. . . . . . . t., . .w. . r..u.n. .3 SO . . : a,...

L o . . o u .e .

. . .s, ra g .. = o. .c. e = O ".'.l.

,i . . .h.; ,7." *. 7, .".' .*.*. .* 0 .. a" #^_.**.*.,*.*..~'. (a"w*"

< , . . - a ."a. -

c a ."

• 3 ." .- . *." -

's . s . g . . . .. .o... ) .3 ,.- 4 -ui .ng, q,: m e n.;,y

. , .o .,. , .w.s , ..a g e u. .- .4. 1 7 4.e, .n. .gw .. ~:- . . _

.--.".u"a.".. O .' .'.~'. ~. '. ^v "e '. " #.;" ."l.al ",.."O'.'.w..'.'...4.^..^. O.# .".". N.."

a w

. . . 3.' a.".' a" a ."..#

s.. U. . .,. k a. . v...o..~,.,,.. .e..C.J.3 w

. . .u. . .T-wa n .. . ....

. C wn

..a. ..e.ea. . g

~..s.. n 3 .a0. . .n .a- u

-, n .,

. .m a. .?... . .. . m.,..C.. . . A ( 0n ..u.s % .e. ..s . n.a . a. .- .n..'r. a. n. w.u.g

. a. l. 4 .3.4 . . .-- . . . .e .q. m w .

4 . ., ..i. ..n. n . .. . ) . 6,. . .

.v . . g ;n. o. ... w . = .

n:.. ,n ..a w ..a.g , , o" 0 0 .aa ,.' *. c. . e.'."7 e C . .a#. *^

k.,

.w a ^ of k.a ,. " a. ". -

3*. 4 .5

• k.o. . g.% f' y, , 44 .aw . .r *- g4. .%~ a., 9. , e., W"S ^ *O

-p. gw.e, s .. . '.*,CCO g . b.ee.O.*. .. ". ".e" ".a".w*.*." a **

4-*".~.

=.

.. e.~y" e ^ *. a. d '. O -.a b'" a.".

aCCidon:.8

.,o,.,.,. d "

C O '.1 C e. '".'.n.

.. ."A- .is" S. a. a y",o "s;, .".* 2 . e '. .".a. .". '.o d.' .9 C'.c .~ a. -- '"e da.a,n c".h. o " *. w" u' .'

• g*. " o.f *.... * *

. .% . . **c.. " . " . "5 . 3 *. .b.e".A c *. u -' .* a. r*.

g . . ,.a w

.- a y< . . .- , a a ..wo- . , . . . " ", .1 a ~. O ". e" -

~,.

f .3 3. .. _

.u. ..

3 .

. .. 4. a

u. f,. ,.9. g .a .a .. w.e. ., a..g .w e- a.

..w e.**) . S 0. .t.r.a.

. . . n.g .-. .. a. .e s..-. . ,4

..e 4

. . . . . - 1rdoAw-... 4.

~. .w.e .e 4

. c .,

-g . a. .w e-,1 a-

- T. .ce..~."

."O" C.". '.".*.* .".> "D,i a. *. *, .

Y. . .I o 4 .e

. . . e e G*" .* "g"* . *'O."'.^*."a.

. ~ . . ' ' ' . '.'.".'.CO.**..*'.'a"' *. ~.

, al- * * "

. ~ . . . e"' C . O

. COPY - -

Cong. Cederberg Page 2 April 26, 1974 cently that the Raanussen study is futile according to an expert fror ':ASA _uho stated this approach had been tried and diccarded as u 21 css long ago in the aerospace program.

Even greater nicrepresentation by Mr. Harris appears in the original data en the citing and population report that was sent to ne. He states, "This document does not even laply that nuclear poner plante precently cperating or under conctruction are not cafely sited. In fact, quite the contrary is true.

All of them have been found acceptable in ter:c of population no wel? ac all other safety considerations."

The internal AEC report directly contradicts this crate-cent. It indicates that about 30% of sites proposed to date have current populationc rhich cnneed the neu population guide-lines. (The report states 70$ fall below these levels (p. E of Appendin a) -- therefore 30% are above.)

Dan Ford of the Union of Concerned Scientists calculated uhich proposed'or opernting plants in the country enceeded thene population guidelinec, There are tuelve, involving nany millionc of peopic. The Midland n-plants and For=1 #2 vere anone- than. -

Furthermore, several conths af ter this, study, the AEC Regulatory Staff, on the basic of these neu siting guidelines, asked that the Newtold Island n-nlant rite be scved~ to Sale:)

pennsylvania, because Neubold Ic' to philadelphia.

l and uns too cloce (10 miles (See October 8, 1973, Enerrt Renort.)

Thece facts cake Mr. Harris' statement nanifectly untrue.

Finally, the report discucces the meeting ' tith utility enecutives en this neu population guidelinec pol. icy on April 12, 1973. It states that the utility enecutives narned that the principal inpact of the policy could be adverse public reaction because these guidelines indicated that the safety of the reactors was in question. And, indeed, the uhole basis for raking thic ctady unc the admission in the report that citing in metropolitan areas chculd be diccouraged for rea-cons of public cafety.

The reasons for not publishing the siting guidelines, then, vere political in nature. Again, public health and safety take a back cent.

Thin is but another enample of the secrecy and deception uith uhich the pronotion end of the AEC is conducted and hou it accc=nocates industry to the detricent of the public.

~

COPY Cong. Cederberg Page 3 April 26,1974 There is no point in bringing any threat to Mr. Harria on thic point. AEC Chairnan Dinic Lee Ray hercelf has grossly nicrepresented many facts about the current nuclear progran to the nation in her appearances on Face the nation and Xeot the Presc TV shouc. I uill be glad to document tnic clait any tine you nich.

For example, Dr. Ray claims that nuclear poner is nec-eacary to reach the goal of energy independence cet forth by Precident Minon. Yet the head of AEC's Materials Management, Frank Baranoucki, states that ne vill be out of economical uranium f uel b-/ 1980 (See article encloced.)

The deception on nuclear poner permeates the pro =otion end of AEC and the inductry.

Sincerely yours, Home address: Mary Sinclair, Co-Director Concolidated Hational Intervenor 5711 suanerset Drive 153 "E" s Midland, Michigan 48640 street,d..

Vashington, D. E.

20003

i i

l ELFORD " AL" C ED ER DERG coau'nts-

.w..w-um e m e u. APPROPRI AT lONS

. ....... ~ ... _ , .. _ , ...

=""- Cottgredd of tije Eittitch fibrates ,,,,"r".  ;"".

- . . . m m.

^* ~'"-

, "; , = .,",;,.,  %)ouse oI EepresentatibL4 w.. _ .o c. .... - - . . , - .

~ ~ ~ EBasbington, D.C. 20515 .

~~'""'a""-'

' May 20, 1974 Ms. Mary Sinclair 5711 Summerset Drive Midland, Michigan 48640

Dear Mary:

Thank you for your recent letter in which you pointed out some misrepresentations in the letter from Mr. John A. Harris responding to your March 27th letter. As usual your arguments were deLailed arid well documented.

However, in your reference to an appropriation for Professor Norman Rasmussen of MIT to study risk probabilities of nuclear plants, you quoted an incorrect figure. I am sure that you meant to type a dollar total of S2 million instead of $2 billion as this is very close to the correct figure.

I appreciate your continued effort to keep me informed on this issue. As always, feel free to contact me if I can be of further assistance.

Sincerely yours, A"'

f= 2 EAC:lb ,

Elford A. Cederberg

(

..- I

5711 Summerset Drive Midland, Michigan 48640 May 24, 1974 Congressman Elford Cederberg United States House of Representatives Unshington, D. C. 20000

Dear Congressman Cederberg:

I apprecirte your response to my letter on the misrep-resentations that .tEC's Director of Information Services cado to you on the nature of the internal AEC documents on the new siting guidelines and safety concerns determined last year by acabers of AEC's Regulatory Staff.

How that you have confizned the fact that the data within aEC's siting report do ru,nort statistien31y the fact that the Hidland and Permi 42 plants do nas meet Acc's new siting gu.ide-lines, our question to you 13, unn.t no trou intend to do n. bout thene matters? Hou are you moin: to re,rnsent tname very ir.-

Mo rt ".nt nuOlle h941tn and GP.l'et'f m9.tter9 l'Or IC9 n90n19 of the Tenth Congressional Lietrict ann Ine usate or nien1:mr?

I have asked Senator Griffin and benator tiart to support getting the whole nuclear problem into the Office of Tech-nology Assessment. I have also asked Senator Hart to hold hearings on all the nuclear issues in his capacity as Chairman of the Environment Committee of the Commerce Department.

All of this correspondence on these siting and safety catters will be placed in AUC's Public Documents room to es-tablish the public record on thece matters.

I regret the typing error unich stated G2 billion dollars uns appropriated for the Rasmussen Study on n-plant accident probabilitics, i'ho figure of U2 million is the one I men nt to use.

Thank you for your prompt attention to these matters.

Sincerely, Home address: Mary Sinclair, Co-Director 5711.Summerset Drive Consolidated National Intervenors Midland,'iichigan 153 "E" Street, S. E.

48640 washington, D. C. 20003

~ ... . e-,,,,~

'2Cnifeb Siafes Senafe wFICE OF THE ASSISTANT MINORITY LEAoER WASHINGTON, D.C. 2Q$10 May 10,1974 Ms. Mary Sinclair 5711 Summerset Drive Midland, Michigan 48640

Dear Ms. Sinclair:

Reference is made to previous correspondence.

The Atomic Energy Commission has furnished my office with a copy of its April 15th response to Congressman Cederberg. No doubt by this time you have received a copy of that report from the Cong re s s man.

With kind regards, I am Sincerely, ,

R ert P. Gr U. S. ' Senator RPG:cm I

l l

l'

5711 cammeract Drive Midland, Michigan 48640 May 24, 1974 Senator Robert Griffin United Statea Sonato Wachington, D. C. 20000

Dear Senator Griffin:

Your letter of May 10th tells me that you received a copy of the letter sont to Congreaanan Cederborg from tne Atomic Energy Conniacion in rcrerence to my reoucat for the AEC in-ternal documents on the alting of nuclear planto and the Tack Force Hoport on abnormal incidents in reactora nov in opera-tion, developed by AEC's Regulatory Staff last year.

That letter la a totally f alse appraisal of what la ac-tually in the internal AEC alting document of April, 1973. The document does support in its statiatical data that there are 12 planta in the United States in operation or under construc-t2on which do not meet the neu alting criteria of the AEC. The Midland plants and Forni d2 are among then. I have pointed these fact.c- out in a rnply to Congreaccan Cederbern. I analy:ed the report by citing tre actual passa;ca and data that t!w authur of the A2C letter, Director of tho Office of Inforcation Ser-Vicea, John Harria, lied about and totally disrepreacnted in his ancuer to Congrecacan Cederberg.

Mr. Harria una undoubtedly relying on the fact that neither Congress::.an Cederborg nor your offico would atudy the docu=ent itacif in order to make cure he una telling the truth.

In this assumption, Mr. Harris nas apparently correct.

I am conding a copy of the lotter I prepared for Congreaa-man Cederberg, analy.~,ing the report in relation to Mr. Harris' letter to you for your atudy. On Hay 21, I received a reply from Congreac an Cederberg, confirming that ny facts and analyses were correct. However, he did not state vhat, if anything, he vould do about theac aerious matters.

It la nou clear that Conrrecenan Cederber78 9 office has ,

been able to octanilan unan tr.c niciana ana . c_w.a P. nuclenr plant sitoa are, Inucet, unnarc in Oneir citinN accortin? to the coat recent altinr criteria or tno at;0 It i n nov a t go clear trw.; m.J c"one :non anu :.;c J alnt Lom:attee Pn te attern:ce tn r n-ceivo us on Inla lasue. .itn tho ce f acta in ninu, cur c.ucct:.an to you n3*.* 1 a , " ca t cc tou, na enc o. ;ienL 7 n' 1 nont inn rt 7 ciectod rowmenuatives in Lonareca, nian to ao nuout i t? no 13 r0n PO C O n J11L' On3 "COpid O n 3 2. 3 I S Gl[0't I am placing all of this correspondence on this issue in AEC's Public Documento Roon in the dochets of both the Midland

Senator R. Griffin Pago 2 May 24, 1974 and the Fermi #2 nuclear plants to catablish the public record on this matter.

Also enclosed is a copy of a statement I presented to the Commission of the ntpartme-: of Natural Resources on April 11, 1974 In this statement, . summari:cd the contents of major technical studiec, documents and articleo published in the past 2 years by EPA, AEC, and independent scientists on the current development of nuclear power and related them to Michi-gen's operating and proposed plants.

In thin study, you will be abic to s'ee hou much of the data developed by the most conpetent scientista anc other professionals in the field haw not been reflected in the en-vironmental impact statements of Michigan's nuclear plants, either by the AEC or the utilities. _ _ _ _

This duplicity between the best information available and how this technology is being promoted is going on all over the country. It cannot continue for long. There are too many citizens' groups that have caught on to this rape of our country and indeed, the planet, under the guice of a saf e, clean and cconomical cncrcy acurce when, ac a matter er ract, nuclear fiosion pouer is none of these things. It is, instead, the technology most threatening to the existence of life on the planet.

I believe you should try to percuade Senator liart to hold hearings on those matters in his capacity as Chairman of the Environment Committee of the Commerce department. Per-haps you could also try to get it placed with the Office of Technological Accesament for study.

I have already brought these issues in current nucicar development to the attention of Congressman Marvin Esch, who la on the Committee for Technological Aasescaent.

Certainly the Joint Coccittee on Atomic Energy has not dealt fairly with Congrens by failing to provide them uith all the developing information on the nuclear program which Con-greos should knou in order to deal effectively uith 10. Mean-time, the JCAE, the AEC, the nuclear industrien and utilities have held back the development of safer, cican for=s of en-erGy.

Many thoughtful and vise scientists within the AEC and outside have unrned that ue are nou making decisions that 1 are as profound as mankind has over nade in relation to lif e on the planet. ,

t

m, Senator R. Griffin Pag 5 3 May 24, 1974 I appeal to you to look at. this whole issue more closely and to get it studied more fully in Congress by more commit-tees.

Yours sincerely, l . .

Hono address: Mary S tir, Co-Director 5711 Sunnerset Drive Consolid.ated national Intervenora Midland, Michigan 153 "E" Street, S. S.

48640 Washington, D. C. 20003 Enclosures Cc: Senator Philip Hart Congresscan 31 ford Cederberg i

t e

e

[

L i

l L

8 5711 su==ercet Drive Midland, Michigan 48640 May 24, 1974 Senator Philip Hart United States Senate Vaohington, D. C. 20000

Dear Senator Unrt:

Both Congressaan Cederberg and Senator Robert Griffin folloued up on ny request for the internal docu=cnts on nu-clear safety problena and the neu guidelines for siting of nucicar reactors that ucre developed by AEC8 s Regulatory Staff and then suppressed by the AEC and the Joint Concittee.

While I urote to you on this matter alco, I have not heard fron your office.

The letter that the AEC Director of Infor=ation Services, J. Harris, sent uith the sunpresced internal docunent on citing uhich has nou been released, falsely reprccented the facta uith-in the docu=ent itacif. I urote to Congrecscan Cederberg, point-ing this out to hin, and he hnc confirced that ny observations were correct.

I vant you to be anare of all this correspondence for two reasons. In the firct place, I hope yop uill take the ac-tion necessary to stop this deception in inforcation provided to the public and cenbers of Congrecc by .iEC spokec en. '.le nuct restore accountability and integrity in government. Second, you are in the position to be very offective in getting the serious issues--the safety, economic and enviror.nental prob-lenc--in nuc1 car development to the public by holding henrings in your capacity as Chairman of the Environ =ent Coccittee of the Concerce Department.

Enclosed is all the correspondence relating to these catters to give you the necessary background that has devel-oped on this matter.

It in nov clen.r thnt Concrecenan Cederberc's office has bonn abic to estnblich Inn the in'nnc e7t Femi m nucien_r nlant ci;or c.re, inc.ec'.. uncare :n ~ ncir citinn acco: c. ire to the mont racont 31 tin? criteria or One EU , 10 1c neu alc,o clear that A C 3 70::03:en anc. Ine J oint C0=100cc nave attennted to de-ceive us or. t t- i r.ue ,

- :ith .e se ractn in :ina, our comtion to vou no ' ic, una; do you, o s one or ;1ce_:P.n 8 3 oG; it-OrtnnG clected renresentatives in Concrezs, nian to co acout it? cno is renrosentir. the nconle on ;c.ia issuc?

I am placing all of this correspondence on this issue in AEC8 c Public Documents hoon in the dockets of both the Midland j

Senator Hart Page 2 May 24, 1974 I am placing all of this correspondence on this issue in AEC8 s Public Documents Room in the dockets of both the Midland and the Fermi d2 nuclear plants to establish the public record on this matter.

Also enclosed is a statement uhich I presented to the Com-mission of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources on May lith. Since that time, House Speaker William Ryan has asked me to draft a proposal for a fact-finding study which vill become the basic for teacning the Michigan Legislature che icaues on nuclear pouer. William Ralls of the Public Service Conmission has asked for all information I have avail-able on the economics of nuclear power.

-A-bill-for a coratorium on nuclear pouer plant construc-tion and licensing vill be introduced to the hichigan Legis-lature uithin a feu days.

I hope you uill give these urgent matters your close attention.

51ncerely, Hone address: Mary Sing _Iair, Co-Director 5711 butmorset Drive Consolid(ited national Intervenors Midland, Michigan 153 "E" street, s. E.

, 48640 Washington, D. C. 20003 Enclosures

\

-f I e

i.

CHICM;O DAILY NEWS, Wednesday, M1y 22,1971

..,...,g,.- m . . . . . 1 C,:,l.racd

,; g front y Ps:s 1 )* @.g4 ,

' , [y,

.sut the nation. A special inder., called the " site pepulation

. . htor," was used to measure the scope cl .;otential safety '

l 9 risk at all 49 locations.

$n d g4

", I Only four piar.t sites were given a higher -isk factor than TU % ) .' d- the Zion plant by the AEC staff and tw) of those were

.L scrapped long ago because of dense populat on nearby, and

- the AEC ordered the third proposed plant, in New Jersey, e] $ O

~

9 0* e moved to another site for the same reason.

r ,

,t U T1.is leaves one nuclear power plant, Indian Point, a part-g

• y Q ,,, ,,_,1. . ly completed facility in Upstate New York, with a higher

! risk factor than the Zion plant. .

. Tile 19)3 'AEC STAFF RET' ORT propot.(d special treat-4' O

. g.h so

• ment for plant sites with populations of 30.0X.within 5 milas, whhin 20 miles and 2 rnillion within to miles'.

- *'- Li ..

Population levels around the Zion plant exceeded these proposed guidelines at all three distances. fly 19S0, accord.

- ing to the staff estimate, 5,184.000 people would be living 4

within 40 miles of the Zion site.

Oi b j

,, )- Under guidelines proposed by the AEC staff, the Zion la -!A -

~

plant and facilities with comparable nerby populations would have to meet special standards. P.)wer companies w uld have to submit an analysis of alternative sites r.nd .

BY liarlan Draeger also add stronger safety controls. -

A rovernment report strongly indicates that the Zion ' DIE PROPOSED 11AILLY NUCLEAR POWER plant be-r.uc! car power plant would have been built at a safer dis- ,

tween Gary and Michigan City also was . liven a high-risk

-sc !n.cn Chiruo if the de;icion were made today, n rep;rt was drafted by the staff of the Atomic Energy rating by the AEC staff in 1973. It was ranked 'as the"I'0th was .

Comminion in April,1973, for use within the AEC an rr,t rnade public until a year later, Early last month, Northern Indiana Public Service Co.

ed In the recently released document, the AEC staff ana1 peter.tial safety hazards to large population centers st;;.ia. ly event of a severe reactor accident.

Nudear power plants should not be bul1t in metropo ,,

areas, the staff said, unless there are ,,significant ,,

remic, enyttramental or other advantages. had " suppressed" the 1973 staff report f) a full year de spite ne $t% million Zion plant, currently the targest nuclear formal requests for all such data in the E ailly license dispute.

f the fadl;ty in the world, is located roughly 40 miles er _

,9 g Lwp Commenwealth Edison completed the two ,

watt reactor umts within the last year. tremely small. Nexertheless it conc!Lded that sites hear Ti!E POTESTIAL PUBLIC !!AZARD is that a major re- populous areas add an " increment of r4sk above that at a cctor accidtnt cc,uld send deadly radioactive clouds over a site in a low population-density area."

wide area. Osann said the AEC did not publicly release the April 17, Su su:h accident ever had occurred, and AEC Chairman 1973, staff report untillast April 9, one Jty after he received r,im 1.u R ay last month termed the risk " trivial." But a a copy of the decision in the Bailly case,

' [y ,'.k[tue

~ .ety study 4',,003 lives.said that, theoredcally, a major accident OSANN AND CillCAGO ATTORNEY .MYRON CllERRY, Ar. Edisca executive said Zion still is "a pretty acceptable. .

a veteran AEC critic, noted sections of the staff report re .

l ,, , , ferrmg to a "mteting with selected utility executives" on*

the subject on April 12,1973. Said the report:

1$ its 1973 report, the AEC regulatory staff reviewed popu - *

,- "The consensus of the meeting was thit the principal im , j' l . Me ll, Co'umn 1 pact of the policy would be the patential adverte public ' l

.. ,. . . ..x_

reactio').to any action which indicated that the saf:ty of reacters was in question. (  !.

"It was agreed, however, that if the policy were to be implemented, there was no vial,le alternative to a 1 u';lic anncuncernent by the AEC."

%c staff " partially adopted" utility su;7;(stions that the policy statement stress the industry's good safety recard, he need for more operating experience and similar pah:ts.

Commonwealth Edison was one of six utthfies reprete.ted at the meeting.

Cherry said the staff rep')it was mrtde phiic cn April 9 onlytnder pressure from Rsiph Nader and others. Ile said the staff deliterately withheld the report for a year and asked: "llow are we to believe any AEC statemer.tr. on safety?" -

?v i .

i l

IN WA5f tlNGTON, CA!!L GUSTIN, an AEC spcktsman, i said the staff report is just an "intrrnal working paper" and

, does not represent official AEC policy.

Gustin said the AEC last December proposed environmen-tal plant siting guidelines, ir.clud;ng a sectier, on populat:on ' ' -

density. Last month, the ALC said it is awaiting rcsuP.s cf '

"more reliable" studies of the populat;on-risk issue by Nor-man Rasmussen, a professor at blassachusetts Instito:e cf Technology.

• Gustin said he did not know if the staff report was con-

, , , . . _. = . . -

' sidered when the Zion plant received its first o;'erating license last year. Dut he added:

" Population density certainly was considered. I can stat;

[

categorically that populatic,n density has been a consid-eratiun throup,hout the nucle.ir program."

ILYRON LEE JR., AN EDISON vice presidant, said the Zion site was selected about ISEG or 1:.67. The chcTice th:n, he explained, was between Zion and a site in La Salle C)unty, south

• cst of Chicago.

Lee said the AEC always has con idered populat.cn den-sity and that the Zion site met "all the criteria" when the con truction license was issued in ISCL "It was realized that Zion was a more densely po;ulated site than anything other than Indian l'omt at the time,"

he said.

"But somebody has to be No. I evea if they're a!! cut :n the

' boondocks. As a result,I would like to think the AEC kd.ed o' at it in rr. ore detail We still think Zicn sti!! is a pretty acceptable site."

Lee said Edison sould ro' have chown a chtferrnt s. e even if the 1973 staff repart haj been av;ilabic tix sc.ui ago. lie said that power companiet try to locrie ;t ris n

• near as possible to their load center, for ulia'oif.ty. ,

"Under today's atmosphere. if we tr.ed to bu:Id Zrar., 2

' don't know if we would r,et approval" Lee said. ,

. 9'

.1