23.04.2013 Views

Management of Commercially Generated Radioactive Waste - U.S. ...

Management of Commercially Generated Radioactive Waste - U.S. ...

Management of Commercially Generated Radioactive Waste - U.S. ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

115<br />

DOSE CALCULATIONS<br />

people (as a group) could reduce their collective dose by moving from Colorado where the<br />

collective dose rate was given as 650,000 man-rem/yr to Louisiana where the collective dose<br />

rate was given as 380,000 man-rem/yr but apparently do not choose to do so. This was<br />

removed because it is believed that most <strong>of</strong> the population does not have the knowledge upon<br />

which to base such a judgement and therefore the illustration was misleading.<br />

Where a reprocessing plant contributed 2,000 man-rem/yr to a regional population the<br />

total for Colorado if the dose rate from background was 258,000 man-rem/yr would be<br />

260,000 man-rem/yr.<br />

Draft p. 1.19<br />

Issue<br />

Some <strong>of</strong> the main conclusions given in the summary concerning radiological impacts are<br />

not readily traced back to the supporting text, e.g., p. 1.19, lines 14 to 17. The text in<br />

the summary section (Section 1.3) states that, "Calculated radiation dose to the total popu-<br />

lation from routine operations including transportation, assuming that all facilities are<br />

located in the same region (a highly conservative and unlikely scenario) amount to no more<br />

than about 0.3% <strong>of</strong> the dose factor <strong>of</strong> less than 15 among fuel cycle options." Although the<br />

summary gives no reference to where the supporting test for this conclusion is, it appears<br />

that the supporting data base is in Tables 3.1.87 (summarizing environmental effects from<br />

routine operations). However, several entries (e.g., see U and Pu recycle column on<br />

p. 3.1.215) give regional population doses (6 x 10 -4 man-rem) that are greater than 0.3%<br />

<strong>of</strong> background as quoted above. (208-NRC)<br />

Response<br />

The values listed in draft Tables 3.1.84 through 3.1.87 are rounded to one significant<br />

figure. This rounding process caused changes in the listed numbers which affected the<br />

changes noted. Therefore, comparison <strong>of</strong> the ratio <strong>of</strong> regional dose to natural background<br />

from these numbers could easily be high by the amount found in the stated example.<br />

Draft p. 1.19<br />

Issue<br />

The commenter noted that a statement is made regarding the occupational population dose<br />

and resultant health effects without identifying the population base. (34)<br />

Response<br />

The work force among which the population dose and health effects were calculated<br />

amounted to about 18,000.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!