ML20008F096
| ML20008F096 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Callaway  |
| Issue date: | 01/08/1976 |
| From: | Drey K AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| To: | Anders W NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20008F090 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8103120249 | |
| Download: ML20008F096 (5) | |
Text
.
J..
~ ^ ^*
. f.; -i--
l-
..... ~, -
... ~
n.:wn r.
7
.x
/.
e Mas Lto A. catY sis wts? PO4e7 AVtNut UNavtaSITY Cif Y. WlESouni 63130 January 8, 1976 L
Pr. William A. Anders, Chaiman,
!"~'
390 Vemeers, Docket Nos. 50-453
..ucles: negulatery w,ommissien and 50-456
..wasn:.ngten, C.
v555 e
Gentlemen:
Enclosed please find an article f:cm the January, '976, F~ msive magacine that I believe ycu will find of interes' F.any pecple have expressed concern a.out the dangers inherent k-in nuclear pcwer plants because of the fallibility of r anh however, the pessibility of exhausting the supply cf
?
'-~
" ~ * " " -
- u. irradiated, experiencec welders for repairs to tne far-toc-frequent leaks in pipes and boilers is a new, equally
.x,: : :..
m r.:.
unsettling concern.
!r:,7 I bepe the Nuclear Regulatory Commission will assist Missouri's cons w ers by requiring that Union Electric disclose the r~~
infe: ation it has declared to be " proprietary" ccncerning c
its ability to finance the proposed Calleway County nucles:
clants befere making any further decisiens about constructien.
' ^ ^
Otherwise, it see.s c;uite likely that the State of Misscuri c: the fedecal government will end up having to bale out Unico Electric just as the Pcwer Authcrity of the State of New Yc:k is having to ccme to the aid of the overextended Censelidated Edisen Company.
F J.[-
t' C e.g., encesing a candle.
Sincerely, Q,7 enclosure l
- (=::::i: '_..:.:.
.;................ :-- - -- ::=...
==
- -=:.
.. :::9==::===:=:......
:. =:
- ==::.=._, = :==. :: :.. :=~.
- .=
..:.: 3:::.::.:=F.
- E::.
P ::.:5.5:-'
=::.
=.:. u.h: :.
=:
- =::
- ~::
- ::=.~: : ::===.::==: :.
- ==:
..y.
.n
- -- ::==. :::: :1:
=i ::-
~. =
- =~:
a.
3
-~
n.~:-
='":.
- .I.=
- -~ %.
~
o.
- r d
O 9
e.m The Nuclear Energy Game:
Genetic Roulette
~
H.W. IBSER Hibakusha. they are called in Japan: the bombed ones. can people's lack of concern for radiation exposure They are the people who survived the nuclear bombings taking place in our nuclear industry. The public, with of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Many have suffered from no bomb to attract its attention, seems generally un-leukemia and other forms of cancer, typically occurring aware of radiation exposure conditions within the nu-years after their exposure to the radiation from the clear establishment. To some extent, perhaps, our bombs. The time lapse is different fer different kinds of attention has been ' erted by debate over potential c:ncers.
hazards posed by nuclear reactor accidents. Whether or The hibakusha have another sort of problem, too: not such debate is justified, current conditions in the Ev:n those showing no sign of harm from the bombs nuclear industry are such that, if they were generally are victims of the prejudice of their countrymen, who known and their genetic implications understood, nu.
l fear the genetic damage suffered by the hibakusha, clear workers might well become the victims of social and do not wish to marry them or their descendants, prejudice like that against the hibakusha.
Hibakusha who have moved from the bombed cities The occupational exposure situation in the United keep their background secret-especially those with States is quite out of harmony with the nuclear estab-marriageable children. lest their children be avoided by lishment's picture of " safe, clean, nuclear energy."
possib!: marriage partners.
Before describing it, and in order to make its signifi-The hibalusha have been studied by the Atomic cance more clear,let us consider the background of the Bomb Casualty Commission (ABCC) since shortly after regulations governing exposure to nuclear radiation.
the American occupation of Japan at the end of World Nobel prize winning geneticist H.J. Muller's pio.
War II. Much has been learned from them about the neering experiments in the 1920s showed that nuclear efficts of nuclear radiation-the invisible, penetrating radiation (then available only from naturally occurring rays produced by nuclear bombs and also by mate.ials radioactive materials) does genetic damage, which produced in nuclear power reactors.
becomes apparent in descendants of those exposed to The plight of the hibakusha contrasts with the Ameri. the radiation. The International Commission on Radio-logical Protection (ICRP), in proposing the allowable H. W. Ibser is a professor ofphysics at the University of limits to radiation exposure which have been adopted California. Sacramento, by the nuclear establishment, stated that the genetic THE PROGRESSIVE /15 s
I g
b i
('
Omm 1
L a
e
=... :
hazard was "of greatest concern." Indeed, that ha:std was taken as the determining factor in the ICRP significant damage. But this was not the point of view considerations.
of the ICRP when it proposed the limits.
According to the Recommendations of the ICRP, l
The ICRP standards stipulate that except for medical Document 2,1966:
purposes, members of the general public should not be "This limitation necessarily in.
ernsei nn the averape, tomnre that 417 ram of volves a compromise between deleterious effects and soci21 benefits.... The Commission is aware of the fa ioniting radiat200 (X. rays or nuclear radiation) per that a proper balance between risks and b capita per year. The tem is a unit of exposure! it is a yet be made, since it requires a more measure of the biologic 21 damage caused by radiation. appraisal of the probable biological dam Persons unfamiliar with the ICRP's reports, includ.
ing workers in the nuclear industry and their families. probable benefits than is presently possible....
However, recommendations in quantitative terms are commonly assume that ICRP recommendations, as adopted by Federal agencies, represent safe levels of needed in the design of power plants and other radia.
tion installations and particularly in making plans for exposure-in the sense that such exposures cause no disposal of radioactive waste products.... It is felt that Uninformed Opinion Ebasco Services, a New York based corporation which fumishes consultation, engineering, and con.
Icarned that there was no scenrion by the public of struction services to the utility industry, recently concem for exposure of the human gene pool to commissioned Louis Harrts and Associates to con.
damaging radiation levels. This seems to be an area duct "A Survey of Public and Leadership Attitudes in which the public, like those of us involved s t!.e Toward Nuclear Power Development in the United survey design, have receise'd h..le education....
States." Results of the poll were published in You can be sure that any future research we do in August 1975.
f he area of nuclear energy wi!! make reference to the problem of genetic damage from rsdiannn e.
The questions included in the poU made no refer.
a ts."
ence to the genetic damage expected to occur as a I compliment Carolyn Setlow for her forthright result of radiation exposures permitted under pre.
letter. But I consider it remarkable that the genetic sent erposure limitation standards. When it pro.
price of nuclear energy should have been so success.
posed these standards, the laternational Commis.
sion on Radiological Protection considered the:n fully hidden from the public that esen a mtjor, tolerable only because development of the nuclear experienced surveyor of public opinion, aedag, as I beHeve, in good faith, should have conducted a industry required as much exposu e as they allowed.
1CRP documents make it dear that the ICRP con-detailed pou (the summary a!cne of the survey results is tweary.nine pages long) of public opinion i
sidered the gee: tic quid pro quo to be of greatest regarding nuclear energy without realizing that the concernin establishing the nuclear energy industry.
criginal promu!gators of the radiation exposure i
Current practice, therefore, involves deliberate genetic damage to the population.
standards we are using considered genetic damage "of greatest concern"in evaluating the benefits of f
, My inquiry as to the reason for lack of reference to nuclear energy.
this important matter by the pod elicited a candid The nuclear industry has apparently managed to response from louis Harris and Associates Senior bring about the acceptance of regulation expected-Vice President Carolyn E.Setlow; by those who proposed thern-to lead to serious "You have presumed in yourletter that the Harris damage of the human gene pool. The public has firm made a decision to omit reference to this matter utterly failed to comprehend the facts about these in our nuclear energy survey. Unfortunately, this was regulations, partly because of their esoteric nature, not a decision but rather aioversight on our part.
but mostly becaase of failure of responsible authori.
We built into our survey instrument, however, open.
ties to publicize them. Under such circumstances ended questioning which would aUow for the expres.
only the unscrupulous and the ignorant can urge the j
sion of concerns that we had not listed in our closed.
expansion of the nuclear energy industry on the ended questioning. l'have reviewed the results and grounds cf public acceptability.
-H. W./.
16/ JANUARY 1976
e
'T Dy w
n e
this 1: vel provid:s reasonab! !atitude for the expansion of atomie energy programs in the foreseeable future. It should be emphasized that the limit may not in fact 7
g represent the proper balance between possible harm
,d[,
//
a and probabic benefit...."
I Some :cientists have urged-unsuccessfully, so far-
' s s
. '/
e that the exposure limits should be greatly reduced;
\\
notable in this regard is John W. Gofman, formerly
'A
?
'/
engaged for years in research for the U.S. Atomic f
g W
Energy Commission on the effects of radiation.
s-p-
.. g g.. _ g 4 EnILns. occunationally ggd to radiation are
,. / /
Vp q, N.
allowed to receive tntrty times as much radiation as the
,- p p,
general population limit-up to five rems rer year. as n
w
'y
- s. ;,
much as three rems in a sincie cuarter (thirteen I /
consecutive weeks). Th'c ICRP s explanationi "Genctic f
.,Q " ji fW effects manifest thamselves in the descendants of ex.
b
,,jNp' -,'
posed indiQduals. De injury, when it appears, may be #%.
A of any deg:ce oIs'e' verity from inconspicuous to lethal.
%'X 3%
b @'[M' 7?
A slight inj'ury will tend to occur in the descendants for d
Mg' j_
many generations, whereas a severe it. jury will be D6 P.- m mwe '
9 eliminated rapidly through the early death of the indi.
Y K' M:M 9 y,p' -
/'
vidual carrying the defective gene [ biological unit of 0
,,,/
- ?
" %e s
genetic transmissal]. Dus the sum total of the effect y
ky caused by a defective ge se until it is eliminated may be W'
.u.
considered to be roughly the same [that is, the same as
' W % a.c that of any other]..The main consideration in the control of genetic damage [ apart from aspects of individual misfortune) is the burden to society in future genera.
tions imposed by an increase in the proportion of individuals with deleterious mutations [ genetic dam.
age). From this point of view, it is immaterial in the long run whether the defective genes are introduced doned the use of virtually untrained supplemental or into the general pool by a few individuals who have ' transient' workers in potentially hazardous radiation received large doses of radiatien, er by many individ-jobs, as long as they received some instruction in safety uals in whom smaller doses have produced corre. procedures and close supervision...."
i spondingly few mutations...."
Reviewing, as an example, the conditions at Nuclear Not all of the 0.17 rem per year accepted as the ' Fuel Services (NFS), _a current 1v shut dnwn euc! ear maximum tolerable average radiation dose for the reactor fuel rerrneessine clant in wen V "ev. New general population is to be taken in person by the York, the presngious journal of the American Associa.
-l layman; some of it must be reserved for use by our tion for the Advancement of Science tells of " workers j
proxies in the nuclear industry. De ICRP is quite... as young as eighteen and others... a!!cged to have i
explicit about this, even giving as an example a sample been recruited frern bars for an a'ternnon'= work....
calculation illustrating this pooling of genetic damage. Some reached leeal eron<ure hmits withia ~ ~m and The mathematical precision of the calculation contrasts were promptly paid off-half a day's pay (at about 53 with the admission of a lack of any adequate knowledge an houd-and replaced, in the derisive phrase of a of the biological damage to be expected from a given forn..t fulltime employe, by ' fresh bodies.' "
amount of exposure to nuclear radiation.
Science asks, "Should there be no limits on the Thus, the relatively large radiation dose allowed extent to which nuclear facilities may spread the bur-nuclear industry workers is justified by the assumption den of occupational exposure?" but points out that that their genetic damage will be shared-diluted to "any sharp restrictions on temporary employment "reasodfe"!-v 't bv matines with the cenerai poou. would no doubt cause considerable anguish in the
~
.!.:,itu. But even this accommocancn is not sufficient to nuclear industry, for indications are that transient enable the naclear establishment to get its work done workers comprise a large portion of the industry's labor with its regular employes only. An article in the Octo.' force...."
btr 11, 1974, issue of Science, " Transient Nuclear Typically, a rather rapid succession of workers may
[
Workers: A Special Case for Standards," reviews the replace one another, as each reaches his dose limit for
" common and longstanding practice l'n the nuclear the quarterin turn. The NFS elant manner is repor'ed industry" which is that industry's " solution" to its to Mve med sis men to --v-
~ e nur from a 5 cit.
problem. Robert Gillette of Science points out that the According to a former NFS employe (who reacned his Fad:ral agency regulating the industry "has long con. exposure limit and the end of his job in three Gn), "I THE PROGRESSIVE /17 t
1 3
)
I
s e..g-xp c.
- 4.,.
n,M, 3 7...,
,,~).% =
don't rzeall a 1;ctura about safety procedures as such. apparently, to infe-" fu!!v af ^e e-in rure -f. e Mainly someone told us about the tools we would be Wed thev ineur. It is not clear that the using, that we had to remove some particles from the walls and they didn't want to burn out their technicians be acte to continue ifit were actuany forced to gi on the job. "We worked in a team, rotating one at a employes a complete explanation of the risks.
time...._You'd be n!! stone in there. The technician The general public is unaware that it is playing was outside on the other side of an airlock sj_around} eenetic rnutette by proxy. lf it is to be f a corner.... I don't know how much supervision is iniormed of all the terms of the nuc! car energy bargain necessary, but I trusted them. I guess I was too dumb to a substantial educational effort will be required-an be frightened."
effort quite out of harmony with the recently acce!.
A former NFS laboratory technician recaUed. "The ersted public relations campaigns of the Atomic Indus.
prevalent feeling was that these people were nuts for trial Forum and the American Nuclear Sxiety.
going in there and doing what they did." Said a former What would be the effect of calling to the attention of laboratory supervisor, "Some were reaUy afraid, and the public the fine print in the nuclear energy barga they'd ask a lot of questions. I just tried to talk them that has been struck "on its behalf" by acencies enmen<*d h-elv ef e <~ < % vin e mnfe<de- ' - -.
into going home, but they wanted the money."
ests in tha deve!e-a--? nf mHe' e-v? Knowing that part of the price of nucIcar energy is genetic, would i
people continue willingly to cooperate in exposing Bernsrd J. Verna, in the September 1975 issue of the themselves to radiation so as to spare regular journal of the American Nuclear Society.Nuclearyews, employes-civen the availability of ether -
c'~<
plant
-g expresses concern lest within a few years the nuclear Are we wining to ouy nuclear energy with a " reason.
industry "run into serious roadblocks due to a lack of able" number of defectis e cW---?
_av,1bbt- -,5-+--
~e - rserne! " He desenbes a re.
'Yould young, inteme-nt "!M-fermed people take cent episode at Indian Point 1, a reactor cwned by temporaryjobs exposmg them to many times their safe Consolidated Edison, New York City's electric utility level of radiation? If not, what snr* of nennte wnuld be company. About 1,500 men were used to locate, make.dnine the maintenance work around nuetear reae en weldinc eraits to, and cover with insulation sia four. claimed by thetr proponents to be operated with the and one half itich hot. water pipes, parts of the plant's most meticulous care used in any industry? What
~
steam generator system. Men worked in radiation fields of up to fimi rems per hour. Even using the of wages should be considered equitable f Would nuclear industry workers be avoided as rnar.
maximum lead shielding possible, the welding was riage partners, as the habakusha have been Jone in a l3 rems-per hour radiation field, allowing i
Unlike much social discrimination, such stigmatization only about fifteee mi mtes of actual wort ner en would have a rational basis.
Verna points out that supervisors tind, not surprisingly, that under such conditions work is done with extremely j
low eft.ei-~v and marv ---~e. Supervisien is accom.
l plished largely by means of closed c're"it tefevision.
The reaction of the public to a candid exposition of Almost everv union weW-in the New York.
Westchester area was usen on the Indian Point job, the genetic hazards posed by the nuclear indu after which more were imported. The repair took six only be a matter of speculation at this time. Perha
}
months, a-d mo 31-o s? mytion.
most people would share the attitude suggested by Dr.
(
Rancho Seco, the Sacramento Municipal Utility Dis. Frank K. Pitt: nan when. as director of waste trict reactor near Sacramento, California, had budgeted ment and transportation for the Atomic Energy f'
mission and hence in charge of the disposal of radioac.
up to 3100,000 for the current year for " radiation tive materials produced by nuclear reactors, he i protection suonort eersonnel," to be supplied through a " unit price contract" by Nuclear Plant Services, a appeared before the Subcommittee on State Energy Policy of the California Assembly in March 1973.
national corporation. When SMUD directors approved Chairman Charles Warren asked whether Pitt the contract, they asked their chief engineer whether would "... as a human being feel better about the comre'ence of all the temporary employes he earth if we could develop other means of thought he might need for niant maintenance could be electricity than, say, nuclear?" Pittman responded, as assured, and whether the regular employes' union recorded in the hearing transe:ipt: "So, I don't think might not object to au the temporary hirings. The chief I'd feel any better, and I guess I have to look a engineer merely assured them that those matters would a strictly personal viewpoint, and that is that fo not be problems. He did not-explain that the + ~ time I have to remairtan es th, it probably wonUliEi'I cualification for the work was s ~avin"<'v W--ht me personkily, and so from that standpoint Idon't think bog.
~
We have invested many billions of dollars in a nuclear that nuclear energy-having it or not having it-is industry whose maintenance depends on the avail. going to make any difference...."
One wonders whether humanity has evolved as strong [
ability of the services of increasinciv laree numbers of an instinct for' the preservation of the species as is peerte whom the industw t as not feund it convenie.".
needed for its survival in a technological age.
O 18/ JANUARY 1976 2'
.