ML20003E506
| ML20003E506 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 03/16/1981 |
| From: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 8104030797 | |
| Download: ML20003E506 (45) | |
Text
. _ _. _
!!i'/,;}',
,i=i,
.- i :1, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'".% u % Llgi i
. !/Jij,4
% llf j "W
O
' u~.
In the Matter of:
MEETING WITH MEMBERS OF THE ADVISORY PANEL l
FOR THE DECONTAMINATION OF TMI, UNIT 2 l
O Merca 16, 1981
,xcz,, 1 earu 43
' Washington, D. C.
A,.,
I D!
s, N
Lh '7.
[
AIAi?
20 i
-t u,s, l
?n s
'l
\\tW w
@M.T a
.ME%T
{
S.
400 Vi_TM a Ave., S.*A. Washin g:n, D. C.
20024 C
Telachena: (202) 554-2345 81040307774
'AR/Gr UNITED STATES OF AMERICA j
l NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
3 (3
x <
5
=
5 6
MEETING WITH MEMBERS OF THE ADVISORY PANEL 7
FOR THE DECONTAMINATION OF TMI, UNIT 2 a[
8 l
dd 9
- (oy 10 E
g jj Room 1130, g
1717 H Street, Northwest, d
12 Washington, D.C.
z::
E 13 Monday, March 16, 1981.
s i
S a7 l
5
~.
k l
2 15 The Commissioners met at 2:03 p.'m.,
pursuant to f
E l
.g notice, the Honorable Joseph Hendrie, Chairman of the 3
al g
17 Commission, presiding.
5
$i 18 Commissioners Present:
l b
19 Joseph Hendrie l
John Ahearne 20 Victor Gilinsky Peter Bradford 21 l C 22 22,
l
..s i
i i
i Al 17FD4EAN RFAORTINt': ("nMP A NY INC
2 1
Members of the TMI Advisorv Panel Present:
2 John E. Minnich Dr. William D.
Travers 3
Robert Reid f
Arthur E. Morris 4
Dr. Nunzio J. Palladino (Not Present)
Dr. Henry J. Wagner, Jr.
=
5 Dr. Thomas Cochran
- h Ms. Ann Trunk (Not Present) 6 Mr. Joel Roth Ms. Jean Kohr (Not Present) 7 Dr. George Tokuhata X
Mr. Thomas Gerusky
)
8 11r. Craig A. Williamson r) ci 9
!g 10 i
j 11 a
y 12 g
13 i
g m
E 14 l
'1 a
l Y
2 15 g
16 A
l g
17 E
!ii 18 E
19 R
2o 21 22 L,
23,
i 24 25 !'
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
m i
I QQ?"'1 M SLis 1s-as t=:cffd d = ' =anar-dpc of a. =ased:s.of da; II:1::ad
~
Stacar Nuclear Zagulassr7 F-edaston he.l.1 on 3-16-81 1s. cha Commission's. ohns-at 1717 I Sc=mac, 3. W., Wast 1=g:=n, D. C.
CLa meet:1=g was opas en public at:=d==-* and obserraed n.
Stia ~~ = ban =nc bemer raviswed, enr=ne=ad, or add -=d and it may contain.d u e-evuedmer.
Dia - --+?t:tz * * = d=d sola17 for ganaral i=fs==acional purposes.
As providad by 10 C22; 9.103, i= is =ce pa== of de fazzaI. or inds= mal racord of A d **m of de ma=:a:s disc =ssed.
TzpT=e=d -- of opd*d -- is dis =ansc=1ge da =mc secessa=117 MT #d*=T dahtictLE or h*Id ad*.
No P anddag or other T
paper may be. filed wi=h. the Commission. i= a=7 precaed1=g as -J.s.
- ssu1= of or add =assed es any sta= aman: or a
- canu1=ad.
harats azcape as cha. Commission sa:7 anzic f:a.
l I
I
(
9 9
e S
a.--
+._....,,.,..,_,.....w,.,
3 1
EEGCIE21EGf 2
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
May we come to order.
('
3 The Commission meets this afternoon with its 4 Advisory Panel for the Decontamination of Three Mile Island 5 Unit 2.
I guess this is the first chance we have had to sit 8 down together.
You have been in business for some time and 7 I believe have had a number of meeting and we have had some 8 correspondence from you and advice which has been very 9 helpful, but so far as I know, this is the first time we 10 have gathered around the same table, and I am very glad to 11 see you.
l l
12 I must say we are very grateful for your 13 participation in this advisory panel. The cleanup up at Unit 1
\\
14 2 at Three Mile is a difficult and sensitive prepositicn, l
15 and your advice is of considerable' help to us in dealing 16 with it.
17 I guess our subjects this afternoon 'are as you 18 would like to put them on the table, Mr. Chairman.
Why l
19 don't I put the floor open for your purposes.
20 HB. MINNICHs Fine, thank you, Commissioner and L
21 Chairman.
We appreciate this opportunity to appear here 22 with you on a matter, of course, of not only mutual but very 23 great-concern to us, and that is the cleanup at Three dile 24 Island, you are exactly right.
25 We have had six meetings to date in which we have ALDERSoN REPORTING CoWPANY,INC, g
4 1
had a number of people appear before us who have fielded 2
questions from the panel members ranging from Department of 3
Energy people to NRC people.
The six meetings have led up 4
to what I believe you will find is a consensus among the 5 membership, to my letter te Mr. Ahearne of February 20th and 6
7 CHAIRMAN HENDRIEs Chairmen are interchangeable 8 here. When you write one of us, you write all of us.
8 (Laughter.)
10 MR. MINNICHa That is fine. I am pleased to hear 11 that.
l 12 The February 20th letter contained six 13 recommendations which we feel very strongly about.
In 1
1 14 addition, I have corresponded with four congressmen and twc l
l 15 senators, Secretary Edwards of the Department of Energy, 18 and, in fact, with P re sid en t Reagan, trying to establish 17 some meetings with the various panels that those congressmen 18 and senators share that deal with the disposal of nuclear 19 waste.
20 I don 't know whether it is necessary for me to oc 21 into the recommendations of our letter of February 20, 22 although we do feel th a t those recommendations we feel very 23 strong about.
We feel if something can begin along these 24 lines in the removal of the radioactive waste from Three 25 Mile Island, it will accomplish several things.
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC,
5 1
Number one, it will show that other than the 2 processing of water, that there is some activity to the
( ')
3 citizens of our area that we represent; that in fact the 4 cleanup has begun.
We feel that it is very, very important 5
to begin some sort of removal cf the radioactive vaste-6 We realize there are certain problems connected 7 thereto, but whether they be political or military or what 8 have you, we feel that somehow it has to be cut through and 9 the vaste must be removed from the island.
It has sat th e re to entirely too long.
11 Secondly, something I tried to express in my 12 letter was that we feel the cleanup cf the water and 13 disposal of the vaste are very intertwined and cannot be 04 separated and cannot, in fact, be treated as two different 15 issues. The radioactive vaste, ence removed from the water, l
16 cannot cont'inue to ' sit on the island for an indefinite i
l 17 period since it appears from te stimon y we have received that 18 no one really has a firm feel as to the reliability of the 19 resins, et cetera and the containers they are stored in.
20 He do have most of our panel members here Jean 21 Kohr, Mrs. Trunk and Dr. Palladino could not be with us 22 today.
Er. Palladino did express his regrets to me.
I 23 would suggest we permit the panel members, if you have time ks 24 to listen to them -- some of them have prepared statements 25 and some.of them would like to express their concerns to ALoERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC,
5 1
rou, and if we may do that, we vill start with Joel Roth.
2 CHAI?EAN HENDRIE:
By all menns, I think that O
3 wou1d de very usefu1.
4 MR. ROTH I would 11ke to second what Jack said 5 on having the opportunity to be here.
I am not a scientist, 8 so therefore I would to just briefly discuss the idea of the 7 whole psychological impact, and I feel that.the panel could 8 be very effective in helping to allevia te distress in the 8 area by being maybe a little more aggressive in meetinas.
10 Jack and I discussed this on the way down. By that 11 I mean perhaps more in different areas, like in Baltimore, 12 lancaster, in York, in areas outside of Harrisburg, in other 13.vords, in allowing the public input before the fact rather s
\\_'
14 than during or after the fact.
15 I think the panel could play a very worthwhile 18 role in that regard in being able to meet with the public l
17 and have even an open-ended discussion type thing, which 18 hopeful 1r could help al1eviate, because that is my main 19 concern, and I think if people feel they do have input and 20 communications, they could be helpful today and also 21 tomorrow.
22 That is what feel r.ight now.
MR. MINNICH:
Mr. Chairman, before Mr. Wagner SG N-)
(
24 speaks, I might point out i.o the panel that my reccliection 25 on the six reconmendations that we have submitted, there Q
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC,
T 7
1 were only two that really had a negative vote from any of 2
the members contained th e re to.
If I remember right,
(~}
3 recommendation number one had a no vote, and recomwendation 4
six -- I believe I voted no on recommendation number 6, and 5
vote hinged on the factor that I did not understand my 6
thoroughly the limi,ts that we were setting there.
I relied on Henry and Tom but still did not feel comfortable with a 7
9 positive vote on tha t issue.
9 So the point I am trying to make is that basically 10 these recommendations are almost solidly behind -- the panel 11 is almost solidly behind all of them.
12 CHAIBMAN HENDRIE:
I might note before we go on, 13 insofar as I know, there is not in fact any difference of
')
14 opinion between the panel, the NBC staff and its view of 15 what ought to be done, or the Commission. We agree that we 18 ought to get on and get that wa ter processed, tha t we cught 17 to get the waste off the island as soon as we are able.
l 18 And the other recommendations, the details of 19 them, I don't know of any substantive differ 4nces of 20 opinion.
So we find ourselves in, oh, not unique but at 21-least the happy position of we are all pretty well agreed 22 here.
23 Tr. Wagner.
(-
24 MR. WAGNER:
I think that since we are in 25 agreement on the generalities, that perhaps we can move to b
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
8 I
some specifics.
The first is we hope the Commission will 2
view f avorably th e request for a waiver on solidification cf 3
()
the lov level resins for the reasons that Chairman Minnich 4 mentioned.
We think the hazard cf solidifica ticn en site is 5 greater than any potential hazard of transportation, 6 particularly if these resins are transported with proper 7 precautions under the guidance of the NRC. That is the first 8
thing.
8 Th e 'second thing is we have gotten the impression 10 that there is some bureaucratic wheel spinning with respect 11 to the role of the DOE in storing the high level waste, and 12 ve really would like some instruct?.cn if you think it would 13 be possible to tell us at what particular point we could (s)
~~
14 have impact to see if we could get the CCE to play a more 15 active role.
16 Since we had the last meeting I understand scme 17 things have ta ken place with respect to instructions to DCE l
18 and even some funding of DOE. with respect to high lovel j
19 ' waste and other purposes, so perhaps you could instruct us l
20 as to how ve could act as a catalyst.
We believe our 21.committea has been able to function in that degree between 22 DOE, NRC and the ulility representing the public, which we 23 try to do.
s; 24 The third thing would be that we do believe that 25 the SDS, perhaps supplemented with the Epicer II syster.,
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
mmm
9
/~8 1
seems to be heading in the direction of being approved by 2
the NRC, and we hope if it is approved by the NRC, if the "N
3 SDS with or without the Epicor II is approved by the NFC, we 4 hope our group will be able to serve as a citizens group sc 5
there will not be any lega1' obstruction to proceeding with 6
the cleanup along those lines and from the standpoint of 7 requiring further public hearings or injunctions.
8 So, speaking personally, I think the thing I would 9 like to get at in today's meeting would be some instruction 10 f rom you as to how are committee can be most effective.
I 11 have been personally very pleased with Mr. Minnich's 12 leadership and feel we have accomplished quite a bit to date 13 and would like to be even scre ef fective in the f uture.
4 2
14 So, I would like to ask for guidelines as to how 15 you think we might be more effectivs.
16 COMMISSIONEB GIIINSKY:
You referred to the 17 hazards of solidification.
Did you mean the solidifica tion 18 process was dangerous, or simply you would like to see the 19 material moved out as soon as possible, earlier than it i
20 'would have been removed had it been solidified?
l 21 MR. WAGNER:
I think both aspects.
I think the 22 risks associated with solidfica tion on site, particularly 23 with respect to low level. resin liners, is greater -- I see (3/
24 no particular public health advantage that would be gotten 25 through solidification of those low level resins.
ALDERSoN REPORT;NG COMPANY,INC,
1C 1
This does not mean I think the high level resins 2 should be solidified, but I think the public as we see it is
'm 3
)
fed up with the slow progress in removal of the waste, and 4 ve think it would be fantastic change in atmosphere if it i
5 could be done that some of the low level wastes are moved l
6 off as soon as possibles that this might break up a log dam 7 or, if you like the other model of a ball of cerd that is 8 ~ tied up in knots and if you start unraveling it, ;erhaps it 8 vill follow.
10 So that is why I thought specifically a vaiver 11 should be given to the requirement for solification of those 12 low level resin liners so they can be taken off very l
13 p ro m p tl y.
~
14 MR. MINNICHs Eight now the public has no l
15 perception of very much being done at all with the f acility.
i 16 They get a perception of a lot of red tape, a lot of back l
l 17 and forth between Washington and GPU, and very little l
18 act-lon. I think it is important how the public perceives l
l l
19 wha t has happened here.
l 20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIEs As a general proposition I 21 think that is probably not altogether an inaccurate 22 perception.
We have been going through a. period of time in 23 which we have been doing a lot of analyzing and writing of M-24 documents and also negotiating, and not so much action on 25 the ' island.
ALDER $oN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, L'
99 1
1 Nov let me run through your items, because they 2 are good ones.
Now, Bernie, we are supposed tc have a paper cs l
3 on this subject of the reconsideration of the solidification 4 liners.
Have I got it yet?
5 MB. 5NYDER:
Chairman Hendrie, you shculd have 8 that in your hands ton o rr o w.
Tomorrow never comes, but in 7 this case it will.
The paper is being typed in final in my 8 office righ t now.
We had some questions that we needed to 9 get resolved between us and Met Ed, which we did resolve in to a meeting about a week ago, and we have resolved among our 11 own office groups any outstanding differences thi.t we had.
12 We have a proposal now coming down that in effect 13 well, it is entirely consistent with what this panel has 14 recommended, and it is bcsically Met Ed's proposal not to 15 require solidification and it doesn't make much sense.
to MB. WAGNER:
This committee came up with this 17 proposal before Met Ed did.
I didn't want you to belie ve 18 from what has been said -- and I'm sure Bernie didn't mean 18 to say that --- that we were following Het Ed 's lead.
It 20 was at the committee 's request that Met Ed came up with a 21 proposal to ask for a waiver of this solidificaton.
I just 22 vanted to make that clear for the record.
23 CHAIRMAN HENDRIEs I think there are goed reasons s
9'~
24 that now can be distinguished why we oug h t to look at that 25 decision of, 'I don 't know, a year and.come months ago again,
's ALDER $oN REPoRTIN3 COMPANY,INC,
~ _ _ _
12 I
and Bernie, if you will make sure that it doesn't slip 2 beyond tomorrow, please.
We have been looking for it up 3 here for some days.
If you can make it tomorrow, well, goed 4
enough, and then we vill try to act expeditiously on that.
5 I think there are some good bases for looking at 6 it again, and my own view is that if care is taken with the 7
tasks in which liners are shipped and so on, that it is a 8 reasonable proposition.
So the question of solification 8 bef ore shipment of the Epicor waste is something we will 10 look at.
11 I agree it would be very desirable to see some 12 action; that just the whole atmosphere there and, perhaps to 13 an extent, here would improve if we could see some definite 14 steps being taken in some of those Epicor liners.
The 15 second and third stage, that is, the polishing resins, the 16 activity levels must be down below the activity levels from 17-spent resin normally shipped from operating plants, and just 18 the movement of those would be a very helpful morale boost.
19 So I think we ought to get rolling on that.
20 Now, the business about the Department of Energy 21 and the eventual removal and acceptance of the higher level 22 waste products has apparently made some reasonable prcgress,
'3 and I think it is fair to note that it is part of some 2
s.J 24 pretty tough discussions about budget and policy within the
~
25 a dministra tion.
wi.
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC,
l 93 4
i 1
'4e here in this independent regulatory agency sort 2
of stand outside that arena in many wayr and are not 3 directly a party to it in any way, but my impression is that 4
1t is the intention of the Secretary of Energy to try to 5 move in the direction we would like to see the movement go.
j 6
I guess in the interest of not perhaps confusing 7 and complicating the situation by more extended discussion 8
at this preliminary stage in public meeting than the facts I 9 have in hand would really support, I kind of want te just to leave tt there.
I think things are moving in the right 11 direction.
12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Joe, if I could just 13 comment, I was glad to see the letter that Mr. Minnich wrcte 14 to Secretary Edwards. I still think DCE is moving much too 15 slowly.
16 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
You were asking how about some 17 signals and what you could do,'and I agree with that and I 18 seant to mention it.
I think your letter to the Secretary 18 was helpful and that from time to time you may want to 20 continue that correspondence.
21 3R. MINNICH: I might mention he has not yet 22 responded.
I don't kncv what that neans.
23 CHAIREAN HENDRIE:
I wouldn 't a ttach much meaning
(.
24 to it sinca if you stop to catalogue between the arrival of 25 messages.to this Commission and the time of replies going n
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC,
14
,-3 1
back out, you probably wouldn't be particularly impressed 2
with ours either.
3 HR. COCHRAN I'll second that.
4
( La uchte r. )
5 CHAIBMAN HENDBIE:
I was going to say you have 6 probably got a member who could speak to that, but I didn't 7 vant to invite you to do it.
8 On getting started on the water processing, I 9 think we have completed and published the programmatic to environmental impact statement. Since it was clear the next 11 step down the line was to get to the processing of the water 12 in _the containment building, why, that piece of the cleanup got, not unnaturally, a pretty good piece of attention in 13
(
14 th'e statement.
l 15 What now remains is for us to get clear with Met 16 Ed what their specific proposal is. We have had a lot of I
11 7 information saying here is what it 1coks like or we are 18 going ~to design it this way, but we need a clear-cut 19 proposition that says we the Licensee propose to you that we L
l l
20 start doing the followings one, two, three, four, doing the l
l 21.SDS with modifications; and Bernie, what is the progress 22 there?
23 ME. SNYDER:
We-just received and I picked up on
\\~
24 Friday at the site 'thejr proposal for that, and we have it 25 under active review, and that is our first priority office.
' 'tY ALDERSoN REPORTING CCMPANY. INC,
15 i
1 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
So we have the proposal.
We 2 have to look at it and do a safety evaluation te assure 3 ourselves that the proposition is a reasonable one in terms 4 of all of the safety aspects, and I guess we also have to 5
look a t it from the standpoint of whether the Programmatic 6 Environmental Impact Statement covers all of the aspects of 7
the proposed operation. If it doesn't, why, then we will 8 have to do an additional assessment to cover what lies 8 outside the PEIS boundaries.
10 My quess is it will not go cutside that bou nd ar y 11 because, as I say, there was a good deal of attention given, l
12 and it seems to me -- what are they proposing?
Its SCS plus 13 Epicor polishing, isn't it?
i 14 MR, SNYDER:
Yes.
To go through both systems.
15 Our initial look at it in the last day or so that I have had l.
16 an opportunity to look at it, it seems to me in a 17 preliminary review it is clearly within the PEIS.
So I 18 don 't think that aspect will be a problem. I think we may 18-have some. questions on the technical aspects of the
~20 operation of the system and safety considerations.
21 But we will, as 'I say, being pursuing that as the 22 highest priority item in my office.
23-CHAIREAN HENDRIE:
Okay.
So, I think that is 24 underway in a way in which from your standpoint you want te 25 watch us processing their proposal and holler if it doesn't t.
ALDERSoN REPORTING
- CCMPANY,'INC,
1e 1
look to you like it is moving along, but at least it appears 2
that the machinery is beginning to g rind, and ra the r than 3
rou having to start the machinery, why, your overview is new 4
to see that it continues to grind forward and doesn't look 5
i like it's stalling out.
I 6
You get to be next, Tom, I guess.
7 MB. HINIICH:
We were going to save him for last, 8 but I suppose we should let him go next.
9 HB. COCHBAN:
First let me say I agree with the 10 recommendations, all of the recommendations in the letter.
11 Secondly, I did a calculation on the health of fects 12 associated with releases either by water or evaporation if 13 the cleanup is down to the levels that are mentioned in 14 Becommendation 6.
If the cleanup is down to rhose levels, 15 which we believe is feacible, I don't think the radio 1Colcal 16 health effects of a release by either mode are significant.
17 There is a strong sentiment on the part of many 18-people, certainly a majority on the committee, that one 19 should not relesse the water, even the cleaned up water, to 20 the Susquehanna because of cther effects, psychological and 21 potential economic effects.
22 The recommendatiens by the committee, however, are 23 - based on a majority view that one does not have to make 24 decisions now that can be deferred; and the recommendation 25 was to simply store the water and postpone the ALDER $oN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, i
ton 0.@,20024 (202) 554-2345 1
17
.s 1
recommendation e it, and possibly other alternatives might 2
be the preferred one.
(m-3 I would have pref erred a little s tronger 4 recommendation than number 6 in that it was my objective te 5 avoid getting into a debate over whether the SDS will 6 perform or not perform as the applicant or the NRC would 7 suggest but simply set some level and say, okay, if you 8 think you can mest that level, that will be you standard; 8 you clean it up un til you do.
10 And I believe they can through polishing and so 11 forth continue cleanup until they meet a level such as I
12 that.
So I would prefer to see some sort of limit en what 13 cleanup has to be achieved in the water.
l j
14 The committee has not really addressed as a 15 committee the issue that I think is more important frc= a 16 radiological standpoint, and that is the worker exposure 17 during the cleanup, the major health effects 1ot only to the 18 workers but to the public at large because the 19 genetically-significant dcsages that are involved is nuch 20 higher from the worker exposure than from any postulated 21 routine releases of these materials.
22 Therefore, I think the Commission should focus its 23 attention on the A1ABA concept in reducing the worker r
As 24 exposure at Three Mile Island more than they perhaps wculd 25 do otherwise.
l a
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC,
98 1
With regard to the Environmental Impact Statement 2 that was just out, I noticed tha t I still have a strong 3
disagreement with the way the staff calculates health 4
effects.
My comments in the draf t paper thst were made 5 available to the TMI office prior to the release of this 6
final Incact Statement don't seem to be reflected in the 7 final Impact Statement.
8 One of the principal disagreements I have with 8
them is tha t they are using as risk estimators numbers taken to from WASH-1400, the radiological dose estimate section.
l' That section was criticized by the Lewis conmittee for not 12 including a proper rance of risk that would be reflected in 13 the two BEIR committee reports, and instead they used cne 14 number, 13 1 cancers per million.manrems and 260 genetic 15 effects.
16 I just note if the upper end of the BEI? three 17 risk numbers were used, instead of 131 cancers, you would 18 use 245, a difference of 80 percent.
Similarly on the 19 genetic effects, the use of 1100 serious genetic effects ;er 20 million aanres instead of 260.
That is a factor cf 4.23.
21 Also there is a difference An that they have 22 reduced the manrem exposure estinata from a range of 2700 to-23 12,000 million aanrens down to 2000 to 8000, a reduction of
(
\\-)
24 about 25 to 33 percent.
In the earlier d raf t they had a r
25-number where they added up for each activity the manrem i
l-ALERSoN 7EPoRTING COMPANY. INC,
99 1
dosages and had another number that was 30,000 manrems.
2 When you combine the differences in the upper limits of the
~
3 health effects, the risk numbers, together with the manrem 4
numbers, you get a difference of a factor of 7 for cancers 5 and 16 for genetic effects.
6 So that says to me the exposures are low and the 7 low end of the BEIB numbers are correct and it's kind of a 8 nonproblems but if the exposures are high and the upper end 8 of the BEIB risk numbers are more correct, then you have 10 some serious health effects associated with cleanup of about 11 11 cancers, 7 fatal and 30 or 40 serious genetic effects.
12 Given the uncertainties in both of th o se 13 parameters, I think it is important to keep the exposures as 14 low as practicable.
I recognire the.t the Commission in its 15 past history has paid a fair amount of attention to the 16 ALABA concept in the design of equipent in teactors and so 17 forth.
l 18 There is very little follow-up, oversight or 18 assurance that ALABA is being met once things get under way 20 and once you are in the operating phase.
I think that given l
21 the potential risk here, we would do well to focus on the 22 health effects and assuring tha t ALARA is met during the 23 entire course of this cleanup.
's-24 25
,)
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC,
43 or3-1 20 1,
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I might comment that I think 2
it's clear that indeed the effects are heaviest from the 3
occupational exposure, even at the upper end of the ranges, 4
taking the range of exposures and the band of estimates on health!
=
5 effects, even at the upper end that you have mentioned, I think 5
]
6 it clearly continues to be absolutely clear that the clean-up E
7 must go ahead; that this, by no means, overbalances some sort X
l 8
of cost-benefit, but rather that you look very carefully at dd 9
the exposures there and do everything that's reasonable to
,z h
10 minimize this.
And I agree with that thrust without necessarily z=
l 11 agreeing with one point or another in the range of estimates.
m g
12 Certainly the application of ALARA principles to S
5 13 the clean-up is something that we ought to watch with great
=
l I4 care and compel very careful attention from Met Ed to it, because 15
-if you can cut down the doses, you certainly ought to do it.
m ai l'
There is another aspect to this, and as time goes e
h 17 along, you may want to keep it in mind and see if some place z
h II if it begins to cut some place, and that is since the worker E
19 occupational dose has much the greatest impact, and if you 3
taxe the sum of the~ worker group and the effects there, and 21 the general public and the effects there, and add them together 22 and discover it's practically all in the worker group, you have l
23 l to work, are we requiring some steps in the clean-up in the 24-q interest 'of minimizing the general.public exposure, which are 25 causing higher exposures to the worker group than would ALDERSON REPARTBNG COM@lX2EJRR
ar3-2 21 1
otherwisel.be the case, and have we perhaps moved off a minimum 2
overall radiation exposure and costs, and the effects from 3
that expoeare?
4 And if that were the case, I think it would be fair a
5 to reexamine the particular points that are at issue there 5l 6
and sea if we should not readjust conditions.
R R
7 Offhand, the one place where it seems to me that Xl 8
could be argued is precisely on the solidification of the EPICOR d
Q 9
resins.
i h
10 There!.is certainly some incremental worker exposure
=
j 11 there, and if we don't geu it back -- we are not going to get 3
y 12 it back through commensurate reduction in the offsite doses, 3
5 13 why, then, it's fair to ask have we chosen the right balance.
m l
14 So nothing else occurs to me as a place where that g
15 question might come up, but as we go along, why, it will be a
j 16 useful to keep it in mind.
e l
ti 17 Whv don't you go ahead?
m i
18 MR. MINNICH:
Mayor Morris from the fair city of H '19 Lancaster.
R 20 MR. MORRIS:
I guess it may be about a year and a 21 half ago that the mayor of Lancaster at that time --
22 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Obviously the years have been 23 i kind to you.
i 24 (Laughter.1 25 MR. MORRIS:
My hair has changed color, but otherwise ALDERSON REPQRTING COMPANY. INC.
22 cr33 I
things are fine.
1 2!
But what hasn' t changed, quite frankly, is the 3
concern that at least the people from my area express on the 4
final disposition of the water, and I'm not an expert like a
5 these gentlemen are.
My background is civil engineering, but h
j 6
not in this particular field.
And while I, as an individual R
d 7
may feel that once clean-up proceeds to the point that we hope h
j 8
that it will, that we have expressed here -- while I, as an d
q 9
individual, may feel that is not a real hazard to the health of 2
10 the public, that's not what the people of my area feel.
And I II get all kinds of people coming to me from all walks of life, 3
f I2 very, very much concerned about the final disposition.
S 5
13 I will say no more about that today than I have a
I4 already said, because we have agreed as a committee to make a g
15 recommendation to you at a later date on that particular issue, m
j 16 but I felt it would be remiss of me if I did not at least w
h I7 comment on it today. As to the general clean-up, and I think u
{
18 I read this in the newspaper, where you did take action on 5
II g
the Final EIS, I agree and I feel comfortable with what you said, 20 that it should proceed expeditiously and in a reasonable manner.
2I '
I was pleased to see what happened with you and 22 what President Reagan announced in the last week, and that 23 ;
is large amounts of money for the clean-up effort, and I feel 24 more comfortable as a panel member and as a mayor with that 25{
philosophy.
l
-1
?
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
23 ar3-*
I I would urge you, however, from the letter that 2
Chairman Minnich has sent to you, that you act as quickly as 3
you possibly can on that lett.er, and I would hope that you 3
~
4 will be giving us some kind of response at some date.
I realize 5
it can't be done right away, but I think you have a very 0
credible committee that worked very hard and put a lot of time b
7 in, and we need credibility also.
And if there is anything X
in that letter you can act on to show the public that you have dd 9
.j responded to something this committee has recommended, I think h
10 that would be extremely good.
z El II And I guess I would close by saying again, I think NI it was Henry who indicated we are looking for your advice as O
13 g
to where we go next.
I#
Mr. Chairman, I think you indicated with the DOE 2
15 thing that maybe you didn't want to inject the NRC into that aa
'O arena, but I personally -- and I hope the rest of this
(
17 committee - would welcome getting into that arena to speed
.a t
ta
=
along the problems with DOE, and not to screw up the works, but g" 19 maybe to unscrew the works, is the way I would like to see us 20 get involved.
21 Again, we are an aggressive group.
We have some 22 v
real qualified people on it, some people that are just 23 qualified because they feel they know the issues and the
)
location.
We want to work.
Please put us to work in the best 25 '
way possible.
li ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANYn INCo
24 cr3-5 1
That's all I have.
e 2
CHAIRMI HE:iDRIE:
All right.
3 Well, certainly the question of what to do with the 4
water once the processing has gone on and we have got the tanks g5 with a couple of million gallons of water, which at least in 0
principle most health physics people would advise you to worry 7
about, there is this considerable problem with putting it in X
j 8
the river.
d I
In fact, we've got an agreement with you which I
.Z 10 think is. still binding that we won't do anything like that, or 3
h II start any move in that direction without discussion and so on.
m
(
12 It's a tough one.
sj 13 l I think for the moment it's wise not to attengt to l
14 close on an answer.
15 '
As far as I know, water that has been processed ij 16 l through the EPICOR process, water that's in storage and the as h
17 stuff that would come through the SDS plus EPICOR polishing, i
18 is perfectly usable - I think it's perfectly usable water II g
for cost purposes,in going back in as wash water, and'I think E
as we decontaminate and work through the containment building II where sorm of that water may cycle around three or four or 22 five times, it seems to me that in fact that cycling is just v
23 what you want to do, because it minimizes the total inventory 24 of water of that character which eventually you will have to do I
25 l something with.
i l
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANYulNC0
)
25 nr3-6 I
So the recycling seems a good idea, and that is l
/-
2 another reason we don't have to close on the decision of eventual l 3
disposal right now.
~l
\\
4 I might note that we had a briefing on Monday from 5
the Staff on the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement.
0 I think we found it a satisfactory proposition.
The n
7, Commission hasn't acted in the sense of publishing, for b
2 k
I instance, a statement by the Commission saying, " Good, we d
~y".
accept this and that's it," and giving further directions to 9
the Staff and so on.
fII Since this meeting was on the schedule, why, it fI seemed like a good idea, among other things, to talk to you, 3
13 4
j and I guess your message in this connection would be, " Good l
a I4 enough.
Go ahead and get moving on it."
l 15 MR. MORRIS:
That's my feeling.
m I0 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I expect we will be able to agree h
II on a Commission statement pretty directly, and that would put l
z 18 all of those things into motion.
h' I
g MR. MINNICH:
Mayor Reid from Middletown.
I'm sure 2a you are ali familiar with Mayor Reia.
I MR. REID: It's pretty tough to be fifth on the agenda.
It seems everyone talked about everything I wanted to talk about.
But as the mayor and a member of the panel, in talking to the citizens in my area, they feel that af ter two 25 I l
years the clean-up is not far enough down the road, and they ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
26 or3-7 1!
believe that if money is a problem, then the federal government 2
should step in.
3 Now we did get some news about the President stepping 4
in and saying that this place has to be cleaned up, and money 5
coming from the federal government.
But a lot of people feel i.
5 0
that the word " study" again is going to cause a lot of problems R
7 and red tape, and money that should be going into the clean-up 2l 8
will go into a study.
And a lot of people feel that after two d
si 9
years, they should know what they're doing at this point, z
h 10 including the NRC.
3 II As far as storage, the people in my area believe m
{
12 that the island is no place for storage of any type of solid
-3 3
5 13 or liquid.
They feel that this material should be moved off a
b I4 the island as quickly as possible.
U 15 j If you remember, back in '72 we had a flood through l
j 16 Hurricane Agnes, and in going over some of the photos that we l
si h
I7 had of the island, quite a bit of that island was covered with z
18 water.
And this is a problem.
A lot of people say that --
II g
especially people from Met Ed feel that the flood would not 20 affect the island, but there are a lot of people in my area who 21 feel that there could be a possible accident because of high 22 water.
And this is one reason why they feel that no storage l
23 ;
whatsoever on the island should be allowed.
M As far as DOE, I did have some communications with l
25 them.
They are in the process of dealing with the waste i
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
27 Or3-8 I
problem.
I can't say exactly what they're going to do at this
-]-
2 time, but there is something that's going to take place shortly.
3 But I think what has to happen -- I think all
()
4 agencies have to get involved with the situation up there, l
take it out of the hands of the politicians.
Although you b
0 might be a politician, wash your hands and say, "I'm not a
_n R
7 politician.
I'm a human being.
The people in that area have a X
8 8
problem and I'm going to work with them."
a dd 9
In talking with Commissioner Minnich he has been g
in contact with some Senators and it seems as though there is a l
11 run-around.
I don't think we can have that at this time because d
12 E
we have a very serious situtation.
I'm quite sure if there had
(')
13 j
been a natural disaster, such as a flood or tornado, everyone E
14 2
would have been there with open arms and a great deal of k
2 15 g
sympathy.
{
16 We didn't have a natural disaster, but we do have a i
17 m
disaster in that area, and we arm far from being out of the words k
18 as far as Threo Mile Island is concerned.
19 l
So I hope you people here, as Commissioners on the 20 NRC, see fit to do everything possible, and I hope you are 21 not taking the attitude of going too slow, because as long as c N 22 (s/
there is a situation as it is, there is a great deel of stress 23 j
on the people of that area.
I
- 24 l You must remember, you have to be able to tell the
-25!
people -- and I have been doing this -- that this is something l
I ALDERSON. REPORTING COMPANYg INC.
' cr3-9 gg 1
new, and we can't just go ahead quickly and make mistakes 2
and cause other problems.
3 So it's hard to sell the people in that area as to (3
4 really what's going on, but the latest thing is that people 5
feel after two years we are not far enough down the road with
=
5 6
the clean-up at the plant, and that federal funds -- not to M
7 ball out Metropolitan Edison Company or GPU, but just to look Xl 8
out for the health and welfare of the people living in that (Jc 9
area.
'r.4 10 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I must say if your town folk i
11 perceive that the clean-up isn' t as far along as it should be is y
12 after two years, and after two years we ought to know where to
,m E
13 go and what to do, well, I can't find a better expression of v'
l 14 my own feelings.
I agree totally.
I agree totally.
If I hope that we are now in a position where most of a
l a[
10 the analyzing and studying and so on lies behind us.
The i
d d
17 intent of that Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, 5
\\
l
}
18 which has taken an awfully long to produce, is precisely to E
19 get that kind of study, analysis and the laying out of options 20,
to make it possible, from this point on, to make timely l
21 decisions.
That's the whole purpose of the thing.
(']
22 Now we'll have to see if we can't make it serve 23 i the purpose it's intended for.
h 24 MR. MINNICH:
We hope that will happen, sir.
25l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Well --
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
I
29 ar10 1
MR. REID:
I have one more thing, Mr. Chairman.
I 2
started in the Borough of Middletown a Community Nuclear 3
Education Council.
It tries to educate the citizens as far as --
O~
4 I put tests in. newspapers, and I gave a title, "What Is Your
=
5 Emergency IQ?"
Different questions that people can answer.
5 6
On information, I really don't believe people are getting 7
enough information.
X j
8 Sure, the information stays with the panel and d
o;
-9 the NRC, but is it really getting out to the citizens in 2
h 10 terminology that they can really understand?
And I think back 3=
11 to March the 28th, when the accident started, I think there is I
g 12 i was so much ignorance on the part of -- I shouldn' t say b
(' -
5 13 ignorance, but just not knowing anything about nuclear energy.
a h
I4 The only thing that pe7ple in that area could associate g
15 puclear energy with was the bomb, and this caused a great deal u
ij 16 of stress and it caused people to use their imaginations, e
l f
17 and their imaginations ran away with them.
s lii 18 I think today in that area if we had the same b
I9 g
problem, I don't think the stress and the panic would be the 3
same, because over the past two years people have tried to 21 educate themselves as far as nuclear energy is concerned.
So g
22 j if we had a problem today, I don't think things would be as l
23 l bad as they were two years ago.
24 (s
I really don't think we are educating the people 25 {
enough, and I think it should be part of the NRC and also GPU I
Jt
30 ar11 I
to try to educate citizens, and using terminology that they 2
can understand.
Not the things you would go through if you 3
were going through a doctor's degree in nuclear energy.
The 3
~
4 little man out there is the person that really doesn't understan@
5 and I think this is where we are failing the people.
Not only 8
6 g
in that area, but all over the country, where you are dealing E
7 with nuclear energy.
X k
0 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Well, again, I must say I agree dd 9
with you.
The question of how vigorous public information g
0 10 jj program this agency ought to support is one that we debate E
I II here on occasion, and the views, including those that are is 3_ 12 pressed upon us by our oversight committees, range all the way c
o from "we ought not to say anything" to a view that "we ought E
14 g
to do a great deal more than we are," by way of trying to make h:
2 15 factual information available and put things out that would mu
~
16 help people understand.
A 6
17 r
So your situation up there in Harrisburg, in my
=a r
l lii 18 view, in many ways is prototypical of the situation of other b
19 g
places in the country where I think a more vigorous public l
20 information program on our part would be useful and helpful.
21 Whether to what extent we can do that depends on a lot of things; not the least of which is the way in which we get
~.
23 I treated by the Congress on the coming budget that we will have 24 l l
to live on.
And at the moment, why, there could be some 25 l problems there.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
31 arl2 I
MR. COCHRAN:
Mr. Chairman, I would like to interject 2
that the need for more public information would suggest that 3
the proposal that I think that came out of the Commission the I
4 last day or so denying the Staff discovery in these licensing 5
processes is a step backwards in that regard.
0 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Well, that's another perhaps c
8 7
7 related -- I would say more distantly related, but another 0
matter which I despair for.
d6 9
MR. COCHPAN:
There are people involved in interventioB j
o h
10 over the TMI issue, not at this table, but there are those ---
=
k I
MR. MINNICH:
Tom Gerusky from our Environmental 2
Protection Agency.
Q l
13 j
MR. GERUSKY:
Gov. Thornburgh, in his letter to E
14 Chairman Ahearne, requested that the three cabinet officers w
2 15 who were members of this panel be taken off and that the three
=x 16 of us be placed on as resource personnel observers for a twofold as t;
17 purpose:
,a lii 18 l
And I think one was to prevent embarrassment to the 1
P g" 19 individual on the panel who may be in a difficult situation I
l 20 dealing with issues and discussions in the governor's office, 21 and also in the panel at the same time, and having to commit 22 G,
publicly in one area and then having the governor having to i
1 23 change that opinion in another area.
And I think that's a wise 24 l decision because, for example, the water issue would be one -
25ll that the governor will be deeply involved with, and any AlMFDCfW
'3 ~9
- ar13
(
discussion of prior -- well, I think you are well aware, Mr.
j 2
Chairman, of the method the governor uses to make his decisions.
3 You were involved in some of them during the accident.
And he 3
4 is very deliberate.
He makes sure he has heard all sides of 5
every issue before a decision is made, and I think our being
=
6 6
Part of this panel, to participate in the discussions, but not f7 to vote on the issues, is important so that we can carry back to 8
him those comments and concerns of the public and the panel dd 9
members, when he has to make recommendations to you on issues, i
h 10 or take a stand for the Commonwealth.
El 11 One other area that was brought out I just became 3
o 12 aware of this week -- and I'm not sure that it is of significant 3
g 13 concern a t this point, but I wanted to at least mention it
~
5 E
14 so that you would be aware of it -- EPA's office in Middletown a
2 15 has served the public and the people of Pennsylvania, and I E
16 think the people of the world, over the past two years by doing 3
mi g
17 an independent environmental monitoring program.
Eg 18 I'm not sure how the President's budget is going to E
6-19 affect that office, but if that office, for any reason, is 9
i n
i 20 "
reduced in size or in funds, we in Pennsylvania will not be 1
21 able to pick up the slack.
We just do not have the staff I
22 and funds available, and I think it's important for the
/
23 Commission and the Staff to keep aware of that situation in 24 Harrisburg, because that's one island of government that has I
25 some credibility and has helped to increase the credibility of i
I' A1_nreisnw aronnTiwe: enMD AMY IMF
33 arl4 1.
l both the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the Nuclear Regulatory m
2l l
Commission by verifying what both of those have been saying for 3l I
a long time.
n) 4ll So I think that office should stay through the e
5 g
clean-up of the accident and their activities should cont.inue.
0 I hope it does, and I will try to make sure it does, but I E
7 just wanted you to be aware of the possibility that funding n
j 8
cuts could affect that.
Od 9
i COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
We have been trying to make o
3 10 z
that point a number of places.
E 11 l
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
It appears that it depends very 6
12 much on whether the responsibility for the Middletown monitoring 3
~
f 13 5
office stays with the division of EPA that has it at the moment, l
14 g
because they appear to be relatively little impacted by the 2
15 g
budget cuts that are proposed.
?
16 l
But there is also a proposition in hand to take
(
17 g
the responsibility for the EPA Middletown operation and put it l
k 18 in another division of EPA, one which is heavily impacted by g
19 i l
budget cuts, and if it goes over there and the funds and the l
20 i
people'are not sent along with it, then tha t division has said 21 they would be unable to support it, and it would have to close.
l 22 l
Now what I have suggested --- and I know John has 23 !
j taken some steps here, trying to help that -- and what I have 24 i j
suggested to people, and I think you are a particularly good 25 person - to suggest it to, is that the views cf Gov. Thornburgh g
a.
34 arl5 I
be made known to the administration and to members of the 2
Pennsylvania delegation on the Hill that might be particularly 3
influential --
q 4
MR. GERUSKY:
Yes, sir, we will proceed.
e 5
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
-- in seeing that this comes out E
0 right.
R 7
With regard to your membership, I think the 3
k 8
Commission is planning to write the governor on this subject d
q 9
in the relatively near future.
z 10 MR. MINNICH:
I had made a suggestion to both
=!
Il the governor and to Mr. Ahearne concerning that.
is g
12 Dr. Tokuhata from the Department of Health, s
5 13 DR. TOKUHATA:
I have a simple question.
In the m
14 PEIS you talk about the health of the employees and the z
h 15 health aspect as well as the health of the general public, and a
i[
I0 I know there is another agency in Washington at NIOSH, and I a6 h
I7 don't know the jurisdictional problems, I just don't know how a
0 NRC interacts with NIOSH, when you talk about the health risks g
of the employees.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Let us look around and see if 21 we -- does anybody know the Occupational Health & Safety Act?
22 Doesn't that provide --- isn't that one of those acts that 3
exempts Atomic Energy Act covered materials?
I see people both nodding and shaking their heads, 25 i MR. GOLD 3 ERG:
Steve Goldberg with the Office of l
AI MEBRAM n,*
j I
35 ar16 I
( '
the Executive Legal Director.
2 I think that's a pretty fair characterization of
)
3 that statute.
It's primarily concerned with the protection of a
4 the workers in the private work force.
e 5
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
What that means is that NRC 5h6 jurisdiction is controlling.
R b
7 MR. SNYDER:
We do have close liaison with NIOSH X
8 in certain limited areas, respiratory equipment, qualification d
8 9
and certification of breathing apparatus and that sort of
.2 10 thing, beczuse there were some problems that occurred in the II past with that, and that was highlighted to us by NIOSH, as a 3
y 12 matter of fact.
3 5
13 So they do certify and we accept their certification m
l 14 for certain equipment, even those used in a radiological h
15' environment.
They are the authorities, really, on that.
m d
I0 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
But the basic regulatory authority ei h
I7 to say okay to a program which allows certain exposure levels I8 to workers is ours?
I' g
MR. SNYDER:
I think that's correct.
E M2. MINNICH:
Craig Williamson from our Department 21 of Emergency Management.
{
22 MR. WILLIAMSON:
Mr. Chairman, I don't believe I 23 have anything to add.
Being the last man on the past here, I J
24 l welcome the opportunity to sit with you, but I don't have 1
25 anything specific to offer or to request.
ar17 36 1
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
All right.
Thank you very much.
l 2
Maybe before we give you a round-up chance, as our m,
liaison officer, Bill, have you got something we ought to --
4 MR. TRAVERS:
No, I don't have anything to add, Mr.
=
5 g
Chairman, except it's a pleasure to serve with this committee.
0 MR. MINNICH:
Mr. Chairman, a couple of comments I
_n 8
7 j
would like to make in wrapping this up:
l 8
Number one, I knew some of the panel members prior d:i 9
i to their appointment to this board, but I would like to commend og
'O I
g whoever made the selection overall.
I think they made a good l
11 selection.
It is representative.
y d
12 3
There are those who would not agree with that q
i E
13 E
statement in the area, but they are hard-working and dedicated E
14 y
to the task they have agreed to serve for, and I think that 2
15 g
speaks well of whoever made the selection.
?
16 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I think Bernie gets most of the i
17 g
credit for the draft list.
li 18 I
lc VOICE:
He's vastly underpaid, though.
19 l
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Yeah, even some of us who are 20 I
on the government's payroll are beginning to feel that way.
I I
21 can appreciate it from his side.
22 m
v MR. COCHRAN:
You ju.t got:a raise now.
23 (Laughter. )
24 is l
MR. MINNICH:
It is now two years since the accident.
25 It will soon be two years to the day.
Some of us were deeply
37 ar18 1
1 involved at that particular time, you folks and many of us on cs 2
this side.
It has been a traumatic experience for our citizenry, 3
and it is time that we get to the task of removing some of the 4
waste from the island.
5 g
The perception I have as a result of'some of my correspondence to the Congress, et cetera, is that they -- and n
8 7
{
I hope I am not misreading them -- but it seems to be that they, j
8 e
ngress, really don't perceive the problem as we do.
dd 9
2 I don't think they consider it as a problem of h
10 g
the immediacy that we perceive it to be.
I wish I could say E
11 l
that were not so, but that's a feeling I have.
d 12 3
The issue of money to clean up the island should 3
13
(
~
not be perceived as a bail-out of Met Ed or GPU.
I think the E
14 y
overriding problem is clean the island up for the safety and 2
15 g
the mental safety of our citizens, and there are those who have j
16 g
experienced great mental anguish as a result of the accident.
i 17 g
We who did not -- I often make the comment that 18 m
perhaps fortunately I was too busy 'during the accident to have 19 l
the mental anguish that many have, but I don't think we can 20 really appreciate what they have gone through.
And in trying 21 to get something accomplished, I think we have to be very 22 sensitive to that mental anguish, regardless of other findings.
The money is a problem.
In fact, the problem of 24 the money makes me as an individual begin to wonder -- and I 25!
l realize here there will not be general agreement with this ALDFRCLON RFPORTING COMP ANY. INC.
i 36 I
Or19 l
I kind of statement -- but it does make me begin to wonder 2
whether in fact we can afford in this country nuclear energy.
3 The question comes up in my mind, wha : happens if 4
we have another accident and this one hasn't even been resolved e
5 g
and there is another accident similar to it somewhere else, 8
6 God forbid.
Who is going to pay for it?
Who is going to take
_n 8
7 j
the responsibility and get us out of this situation?
]
8 I
ight mention to you that Mayor Reid did not bring dd 9
i it up, but I think it should be brought up -- I believe there h
10 z
is a requirement that Met Ed particularly in the state and g
11 y
the local communities must have a test run of the evacuation o
12 j
plan in the event there would be another emergency.
s 13 E
I might suggest to you that when that test run has E
14 y
been made, that it would be wise to call together a representa-2 15 g
tive group of the communities involved, including the state, T
16 l
to hash over any problams we foresee in running through that 6
17 m
test.
b 18
=
I know the mayor is particularly anxious to have a V
19 l
l test in his area.
20 MR. REID:
We almost had one.
21 MR. MINNICH:
He tried very hard.
We didn't quite 22 l
agree on it at that time, but I believe that is a requirement 23 !
that must be done, and I would suggest af ter that has been gone through, that we do have a round-table discussion on it.
i 25,
I think much could come out of an approach to that plan.
i l
AI NFDCAN DFDADTIMr:: f* FWD A MY I Mr*
39 ar20 1
MR. WILLIAMSON:
Mr. Chairman, that's been set for 2
June 2.
3 MR. MINNICH:
I thought it was some time this c.
4 summer.
e 5
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Bernie, please note.
l h
]
6 MR. MINNICH:
I do strongly concur with the 7
request that was made earlier that we, the committee, would X
j 8
appreciate some guidance from you, the Commission.
I thought d
ci 9
the suggestion to deal with the water was a good one, to 10 concentrate on the water and not flounder around trying to Ezq 11 find out where.we the panel should go.
m j
12 So if there is another given area -- perhaps it 4
l g
13 l is concern for the worker exposure --- that you, the 1
a l
14 Commission, would have us deal with specifically, we would El 15 appreciate that kind of guidance.
We don't want to spin our a
j 16 wheels, we don't want to get into the sense of not really w
ll 17-accomplishing something and therefore discouraging a panel E
k 18 whose members are very busy people and very concerned in other C
19 areas, and then drift away simply from the sense of feeling 20 that we are not dealing with issues.
21 These are some of the things I will leave the 22 panel with -- the Commission with.
And again I consider it a 1_u.<
23 l privilege.
I may not accomplish much, but I do consider it a 24 privilege of serving with this panel and meeting with you 25 l
- people, i
t ar%
10 ar21 1
Thank you.
2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Thank you.
3 I have not given my colleagues much of a chance 4
to comment.
=
5 g'
Let me start with Peter.
8 6
Vic, do you have anything?
e.
R 7
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I don't have anything to X]
8 add, except to thank you for coming, and I very much appreciate dd 9
g hearing from you.
h 10 z
I was very impressed with the presentation.
E=
11 g
MR. MINNICH:
Thank you.
r5 12 E
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
John?
c 13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I echo Vic's statemen6 of E
14 g
thanks.
I will make recommendations to Chairman Hendrie 2
15 g
that we do respond specifically to the letters you sent.
I
~
l l
16 certainly appreciated very much the rapid pace with which ll 17 you moved forward, because I recognized you did not have a w
i a:
lii 18
=
great deal of time to address it, and it was a big help to have l
19 l
this in hand as we turn to the PEIS, and I do want to express 20 my appreciation for your willingness to come down and meet with us, and I hope we can do that on a relatively periodic basis, 22 i
and for you personally, having had the experience of trying l
a 23 l
to get a group of people to work together with diverse 24 i j
j opinions, I can certainly admire the cooperation you have in 25,
l your group.
I l
s l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
4i cr22 1
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I think he had better members 2l than you did, John.
(Laughter. )
m 4
MR. MORRIS:
Don't take too much credibility away
=
5 g
from that.
He's done a good job.
3 0
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Let me add my thanks to those
_e.
R 7
j of my colleagues.
We do appreciate your coming and the j
8 discussion in the meeting.
If you came every few weeks, d
d 9
i why, it would be too much 'for you and probably more than we oN 10 E
could stand.
11 j
But, on the other hand, I think there will be ti 12 j
times down the line when there are pressing issues before us d
13
~
that these sort of face-to-face discussions are very useful.
E 14 y
We will indeed try to respond to your letters.
2 15 g
With regard to suggestions to you as to what the 16 panel might particularly look for in the near term, we will be d
17 g
trying to respond to the solidification issue, and I am sure, 18
=
without my suggesting it to you, the panel will continue to be l
19 l intensely interested and keep it itself very well informed 20 on how things are going.
21 With regard to the overall matter of beginning to 22 move some waste off the island, and aeeing in the assorted v
23 branches of government, state and federal, that we can see 24 who is going to take these wastes where, and seeing that that is going ahead, and I. am sure again, that without my telling i
. svt w
1?
c ar23 I
you, that if you see that looking as though it is beginning 2
to slow down and come apart, that you won't hesitate to let us 3-know.
4 The aspect that I sungested to you, that there may e
5 come some matters on which one wants to reexamine the balance b
6 between public exposure and worker exposure -- as I said, I R
7 don' t have anything in particular in mind in that area, except j
8 it does seem to me the EPICOR resin solidification had that d
o; 9
kind of issue imbedded in it, but I think that question will 10
~
and I am not sure move toward resolution on this other track, II what else there is, is f
I2 I have just suggested Bill and Bernie and your own 3
5 13 alert view of things, if you see an area where a reexamination a
l 14 '
of the best balance is overall, why, I think that would be a g
15 useful one.
u i[
I0 And then clearly down the line -- we don't have to as h
I7 face it now --- but there is going to come a time when we are m
18 going to have to deal with what we do with the water.
There A
19 g
could come some of these other sorts of disposal questions.
20 Hopefully we will be able to arrange for accommodation of II thee higher level waste elsewhere.
22 It is not inconceivable to me that down the line 23 we may have some proolem with low level waste from accident M
clean-up, not the normal operating sort of stuff, bu't from 25l accident clean-up, where the place that you sent the high level Al MFRCAM RFPnRTING rnMP ANY INC
IJ i
ar24 I
stuff will say, " Wait a minute, you know.
We've already done as 2
much as we could do for you, and that other stuff isn't our 3
bag.
We don't deal with that kind of thing."
4 And if we run out of commercial low level disposal 5
facilities, it's not inconceivable that we could have that j
6 kind of a problem.
e g
2 7
So I think we will need your advice and occasionally X
0 you may need to help stiffen us up, and other times you can d
c 9
.j at least give us solace over the problems.
But we will look h
10 y
forward to hearing from you.
=
MR. MINNICH:
Thank you again.
d 12 z
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Thank you very much.
cd 13 g
(Whereupon, at 3 :17 p.m., the meeting was E
14 adjourned. )
as 2
15 i
l E
16 l
d g
17 I
E 18 N
19 2o i l
21 22 m:
I 23!
i 24 i I
25 i l
l i
l I
l
\\
ALDEREQN REP _ORTING COMPANY. INC, _
NUCLEAR 3EGULATORY CO. 4ISSION W
This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the NRC Commission in the matter of:
Date of Proceeding:
March 16, 1981 Docket flumber:
Place of Proceeding:
unow 4 nynn.
n_c_
were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the Cccmission.
ANN RILEY Official Reporter (Typed)
I
/
"v cg-
_. a.gu Official Reporter (Signh ure) i
{
9 8-Wh v-
---e w
-, - - - - ~
y m
,,m--n
- ~
w-ew,
-~--,,-w-
--w----,--
r-
=,
'I'
- f. l
=syutgj
-- a sOU
.J l
e g -,oygag a cg o, cmece a so.an c3 J aoa=*a # ac.T*o ASS:S_AN.*. SOU,CTTO c O M M/sQfn
-..=
em. =3c e
s.c=x c,=.ussc.
y so o* ase
- = m.c U
wtr se :.Av uuss A:omrss
%,g e o aosiass twu e,
'".~'.'n;.~n";*
O PM
~"~
Q Q
3-
%- d. e..&
&:t.,.-
~
~
f 2:
DAUPHIN COUNTY MAmsaumo.pcNusvt.v4N A February 23, 1981 Commissioner John F. Ahearne United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washing:en, D.C.
20555
Dear Commissioner Ahearne:
During the Advisory Panel for Decontamination of Three Mile Island, Unit 2 meeting of February 11, the disposal of the existing low-level i
wasta was discussed.
The discussion centered around the resins con-l
=aining low-level radioac:ivity, as a result of u:111:ation of the Epicor-2 System.
At the above referenced meetirg, the Panel agreed and in fact authorized
=e to correspond with you concerning this mat:er.
We feel tha: the i
N.F..C.
should waive che requirement for solidification of the subjec:
waste when Metropoli:an Edison has met all requirements insofar as l
avoidance of leakage, safe transportation, shielding and other precau: ions for shipping the wastes in present containers.
We believe the was:e should be shipped to a commercial burial si:e as soon as possible, l
provided there are no dangers to the public during the transportation.
Metropolitan Edison has submitted a request for such a waiver and we urge immedia:e consideration of Met Ed's request.
~
It is our feeling that Three Mile Island has served as a storage si:e for an unconscionable amount of time, and urge he safe removal of :he resins in the present s: ate as soon as safety requirements have been me:.
[ y Should you have any questions on the con:ents of this let:er, please do no: hesi: ate to contac: me.
My Sincerely yours, v
)
y$
.r',,s i. 6W.#.N John E. Minnich, Chair =an Ci:izens Advisory Panel for the Decon:amina: ion of Three Mile Island, Uni: 2
s Advisory Panel f : the Decontamination of Three Mile Island, Unit 2 s
I
!?." Licison:
I Dr. Willie D. Travers f
Local Gova - en: Members:
Mr. John E. Minnich, Chairman Dauphin County Co::=ission L er Robert Reid 7
Middletoda, Pennsylvanis Mayor Arthur E. Morris Lancaster, Pennsylvania Scientif12-Co=:nunity Memberr:
Dr. Nunzi) J. Palladino l
Pennsylva51a State University Dr. Henry J. W.gner, Jr., M.D.
j Johns Hop tine Univers1ry l
Dr. Thomaa Cochran Na: ural l'usources Defense Council i
l l-General Phblic Members:
l Mrs. Ann y nk Middletov2, Pennsylvania l
Mr. Joel Loth Chairman, T:C Alert Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Mrs. Jean Kohr Susquehanc.m Valley Alliance i
l Lancastar? Pennsylvania official Observers for the Co::monwealth of Pennsvivania:
1 Dr. Georga Tokuhata Departman of Health ;"
Mr. Thomas Gerucky Departmenh of Environmental Resources i
l Mr. Craig[ A. WilHammon Pennsylvania E=argency Management Agency
su s
~ w,.. _m.
u=
i~c=s a
-..s..- -
.ssis s=um
. c =.
.p{ c O M MIsS s _:m==,.s.c cm~.m~.
f OV t m = c,.v
- uss== ss$
/
y m,a.
ma n os
,o m ~ n s
Q nLi p
m.:ui h
b7 2h." M'"
.. e W... _. 6 v.
N =' :. 3 _ g
~
Ms
.M:
-v Y*
s m
DAUPHIN COUNTY MAARtSSURG. PENNSP,VANLA Pebruary 20, 1981 Co==issioner John F. Ahearne, Chair =an United S:a:es Nuclear Regulatory Co= mission Washington, D.C.
20555
Dear Commissioner Ahearne:
I am pleased to transmit to you the first report of the Advisory Panel for the Decontamination of Three Mile Island, Unit T o.
As you know, i
the Advisory Panel was established by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on October 28, 1980, to consult wfth and provide advice to the Commission on clean-up activi:ies on Three Mile Island.
The Commission requested that the Advisory Panel provide advice on the Draf: Programmatic Environ-mental Impac: Statement (PEIS, NUREG-0683).
In your letter of November 7, 1980, you reques:ed that we address specifically the question of disposition of processed water.
During a later :alephone conversa: ion, you set the deadline on the water question as of February 28, 1981.
l 1
l PEIS.
It has held several
~he Advisory Panel has reviawee the Draf:
l meetings, and heard :es:imony by represen:atives of Metropolitan Edison Company /Ceneral Public Utilities, the Department of Energy, the Advisory Commi :ee on Reactor Safety and Safeguards, and members of the public.
3'efore I de: ail the recommendations of the Panel concerning :he proces-sing of :he contaminated water a: TMI, I have been asked to express a very real concern of the panel members in general.
That concern is the inability to dispose of the low /high level radioac:ive waste generated as a result,of processing the con:aminated water.
The Panel's deep concern is that TMI is being converted into a storage area for this waste, as a resul: of a lack of, or the inabili:y of, the Regulatory a:c. ies :o allow disposal of -he waste promptly and efficiently.
We, YY
- 5e Panel, feel cha: disposal of the waste is a package-item in :he V
3 clean up of the wa:er.
It makes lic le sense :o process :he water if'the resul:ing radioactive waste is :o be removed frem the Con:ainmen:
I 3uilding :o other areas on the Island for indefin'i:e storage.
I canno:
! @q emphasize enough :he concern of :he Panel on this ma::er.
I would g
1 close this paragraph by advising you that reco=mendations on disposal 4
of :he radioactive vascas will be for:hcoming from the Panel.
- w..
Following are the recom=endations of :he panel concerning the con:ami,
natec wa:er:
RECOMMENDATION #1.
Tha:
he radioactive contamina:ed wa:er loca:ed in the Reac:or 3uildin5 be decontamina:ed as rapidly as possible, using the licensees proposed Submerged Deminerali:e System (SDS) currently being cons::ue:ed.
This recommenda: ion, specific :o :he l
SDS Sys:em, is con:ingen: upon approval of tha: sys:em by :he Nuclear Regulatory Com=ission.
i l
RECOMMENDATION #2.
That the.approximately 1.6 million j
gallons of decon:aminated wa:er expected as a resul: of
(
TMI-2 decontamination activi:ies, be scored initially l
in on-site tanks, to permit accurate assessment of its l
residual radioaccivi:y conter: prior to a final decision
(
regarding ultimate disposal of the water.
RECOMMENDATION #3.
That :he appropriateness of the con-i tinued on-site. storage of the decon:aminated water be reviewed. annually by this Advisory Panel.
RECOMMENDATION #4 That to the ex:ent practicable, Metropoli:an Edison Company should minimi:e additional on-si:e water requirements, by maximizing the use of recycled decontaminated water.
RECOMMENDATION #5. That the radioac:ive contaminancs (excepting tricium) in the unprocessed wa:e:
at TMI-2 should be reconcentrated and immobilized as expeditiously as possible, consistent wi:h Regulatory requirements.
RECOMMENDATION #6.
That the design and operation of l-decon:amina: ion systems for processing radioac:ively contaminated water should mini =ise, as far as practicable, the amounts of residual radioactivity in the resulting processed water.
The Panel believes the following curie inventories for all processed water resulting from clean-up activities are achievable:
Isotone Curies Sr-89,90 0.1 Cs-134 0.2 Cs-137
- 0. 5 ~
Should you have any ques: ions concerning the above recommenda: ions. par-
- !cularly background informa: ion, I would be more than happy :o provide the information to you.
At this time, I do not feel it appropriate to go into background discussions, since such information is already available in the ::anscrip:s provided from each meeting of the Advisory Panel.
Looking forward to your response, I am Sincerely yours,
'qJ;# E. hivmck John E. Minnich, Chairman
~m-JswWiss m?