13.05.2014 Views

Chernobyl Nuclear Accident Congressional Hearings Transcript

Chernobyl Nuclear Accident Congressional Hearings Transcript

Chernobyl Nuclear Accident Congressional Hearings Transcript

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

123<br />

Juue 19, 1986 Committee oti Energy arid Natural Resources<br />

On page 85 in the hearing transcript, Senator Metzenbaum,<br />

in a quote Erom the London Times , stated EPA ignored some of<br />

the data because the Agency thought the readings were too<br />

high. He asked Mr. Meyers to respond.<br />

EPA's response follows:<br />

As part of the Federal Task. Force's response to the<br />

<strong>Chernobyl</strong> accident, EPA's Office of Radiation Programs made<br />

extensive efforts to obtain credible radiation data from<br />

foreign countries and to make that data available to all<br />

interested parties. EPA and other Federal agencies requested<br />

and obtained data through contacts in the international<br />

scientific community, the World Health Organization, the<br />

International Atomic Energy Agency, and through formal requests<br />

of governments via the State Department.<br />

The following quality assurance and reporting rationale<br />

were applied to all data:<br />

o Data must have originated from a reputable health<br />

organization.<br />

o Data would be reported as received if there were no<br />

obvious errors.<br />

o All values would be checked for errors in data entry.<br />

o Extreme or conflicting values would be reviewed and<br />

corrected, if identified as erroneous.<br />

This "real time" reporting rationale allowed EPA to make<br />

the data available for timely dose and risk calculations while<br />

still assuring reasonable quality. However, a few situations<br />

were encountered which required delays in reporting data and/or<br />

revisions of reported values: ^<br />

o Telex reports identified direct exposure values in<br />

excess of 100 Rads per hour (R/H), The telex printed in upper<br />

case only and there was a space just before the R/H. A second<br />

telex identified the values as MICRO R/H (uR/H). The<br />

( u= 10"^) had not printed in the first telex.<br />

o Values of 1,000 mR/H (extremely elevated but possible)<br />

were reported by EPA, but later corrected to 1,000 w R/H when<br />

that same country identified normal background levels as<br />

10 mR/H. A background or ambient level of 10 u R/H is what<br />

would be normally expected for that country. The country was

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!