ML20127H566
| ML20127H566 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Monticello  |
| Issue date: | 04/08/1969 |
| From: | Mccarthy E SENATE |
| To: | US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9211180547 | |
| Download: ML20127H566 (5) | |
Text
_
,e
,u..6.......
O'~i' ".i'!.',."C'"'
!!i*/.'. ",I"R'.'.'
I.
0,."!.Z..' O...'.'J:." '.".'.'!.".'*.t.". ".d..'#,0 ';!i
'{
/.
p.
M.niIeD J,,lGICf' J CU GIC s,
.u
_,.. f,,".'/.,'.'0'.J. 0.1;....
'.'... m
.,. "".'.! L'.'#f,*,"......
So" a* * * " " ***
WASHiNotoN D.C. 30510 April 8, 1969 Chairman Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D.C.
20545 i
Dear Sir:
I am onclosing a. copy of a letter which I received from
)
j a constituent regarding the proposed nuc1 car power plant J.n Monticello, Minnesota.
I would apprecinto having your comments on the questions l
raised about this matter and a report on the status of the proposed plant.
Sincerely yours,
[
u M Ca 8
}
EJM:jw i
e i'
{
1
- h Rac'd Off. Dir, gf Reg.
Date 4/inik) 9 11180547 69040s PDR ADOCK 05000263 PDR
- - L.
1.
- 2_
a u..
u.-
a.
L,.
144 Melbourne Avenuo Southeast Minneapolis, Minnesota 65414 s.
i l
j Son:. tor i;usene Uc0arthy 3 nste Offico Buildin;
- 'achington D.C.
i Lonr Jonator 1'c0a thys r
.a a citizen of '!innosota. I hsve stjocted to the proposed nucioar po.ior
]
pi:.nt in Monticello. I toliove no one his the ri;ht to subject any cit.
I 1:en to the dangers of r..diation... no cne ht.c the richt to n:.he a j
v lue judstont;thr.t the rick to life is offset by the tenefits of such a i
no one'htis the richt to fou". ie rivers,cnd lakes trhich belong sy6 tem.
to the poo;1e of the ctt.to.
i l
I I t.: encusing a report I hava prepared and circulated at the L7I, City l
Convention in Min'neapolis. I have asked othors to, join no 'in protostint; _
the licensing of this plant to du:ap r:.diodetive taste into the Mississippi.
)
I find the ider. aluost unbelievable.
l I imploro you to use evory mee.no at your disposal to help tiock this licensins.
Sincerely,
'.,. M wv j
Russell "de.tling j
f 9
(
S 4
9 e
e 4
l
- t g
~
y-g-w.
.r'
a~*yas>+.er m
e e
-y-y I,-p,y
.,.gm py.s,-9 g9
+
-++eer
,w-ri v-mm w,
A
h ~
.I'.
.y
,.. 4 1__..
.g........,,
~
w 8.
a h
-3
~~
.)
l
()
.sa
~ _
.g
, e i
J 'ei MONTICELLO: A nuclear energy gambl,e The stakes autatiori, cancer, death m
j i
I i
Citizens are concerned about the idea of radioactive wastes being dumped into F
- Mississippi.at Monticello.,We should be. It's our drinking ind in spite of the assurances of safety from the Atomic Energy.
water.
Co.~ hiss..n and Northern States Power Company -- the safety and performance records of nuclear energy plants have been dismal.
f i
/
of the original 12 nuclear power plants that have been put into operation, 8'have f ailed -- including the one at Elk River where radioactive leaker
- i forced shutdown -- and the Northern titates Power " Pathfinder *' plant in-sloux ra11s which exceeded its yearly concentration limit despite being' operated below full power. Three plants have been abandoned (one at an
.I
' estimated $7 million decontamination cost, paid by the taxpayer, of course).1 J.
In all cases where these plants failed, citizens had been assured, as now, of complete safety.
- h. If there were a real dancer to health free raf.loactive waste, would the Atomic Energy Commission approve of such a plant?
It ' appears that the AEC not only would but in fact has approved of A.
l The Hanford, Washington Atomic Energy facility on the such plants.
4 Columbia River is an example.
, *s-A 1965 study'showed that oregon counties bordering the Columbia River l
-l downstream from the Hanford facility had a 53 percent higher cancer j
rate than the rest of the state. The JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH j
i reported: "This physiographic pattern of malignancy provides strong circumstantial evidence that not just leukemia but all types of cancer are influenced by bodily ingested radioisotopes in quantities heretofore thought safe. 2 We might add, ' declared safe' by the AEC.
i l
11 1'
a nuclear power installation where even' f
O.
But whv would the AEC aDprove l
the slightest question of safety exists?_
It is 'important to keep in mind that the AEC was establis'hed to promote A.
l the use of nuclear energy _ Limiting such use, even for safety reasons, is clearly a conflict of interest for the AEC.
l Q.
What is a ' safe level' of radioactivity in the environment?>
~. There is no ' safe level' of radioactivity. Radiation as minimal as.>
l
-A.
X-ray exposure of an unborn child is associated with leukemia-in later, j
~
life.2 standards depend on how many deaths and mutations we are willing i
to accept.
'For' example, the Federal Radiation Council has set its standards at
~
.5 rem yearly exposure.
If we assume the population of the Twin cities metropolitan area to be two million, then a continuing yearl'y exposuia-of.5 rem -- the FRC standard dose '- would be expected to cause from
,g 10 to 100 cases of leukemia per year and about an equal number 'of other l
3 4
s p
4 k.
~ \\
- s
=
e.
a a
[
=
.,y.,,m-
..,.7
.,.m---m-w--
mp.--
. ~.
., woy,.,.p-,wy._-,y
.,...,-.q-..%
g..,
.,,,.-.m,,,.-
m v
. -..4 y
- y. v m,y s.,
-.e...:
h... _.
( p..j...... :
-L :. Q-......,.-._.__...
. g f.
4
.,, )
6
~
(2)
\\
t
... Phether a loss of this magnitude is types of neoplasms (cancer)
I acceptable to society can only be determined by consgdering the benefits I
to be gained from a particular use of atomic energy."
A question one might ask is 'whoso benefits and whose deaths'/'
How nuch radioactive waste would the prooosed Montleello Plant discharge Q.
~into the Mi=sissipoi?
l waste, including fuel leaks, of.
?'g $. Northern States Power estimates a tota 91.4 Curies yearly 4 I
cencral Electric, who has a reputation for seriously underestimating f
Note radioactive discharge, guesses 30,000 cvcies the first year.
29,998.6 Curies. The real ficure is anybody's guess.
the discrepancy:
We can
("A curie is equivalent to the activity of one gram of radium.
all recall the excitomont and intensivo searchos. instituted when capsules Yet the containing a few milligrams of radium were lost or misplaced.
quantity of radioactivity proposed for release from-a single nucicar' power plant each year, even under the most optimistic assumptions as 1
to its operation, is several times the activity of the entire world.
supply of radium.")4 What about' the present argument between Northern States Power and the.
- Pollution Control Aconey as to allowable limits of radioactive contami__
Q.
nation?
i l
This is a sham battle diverting attention from the real point that no, A.
amount of radioactive waste is safe and under g conditions should dumping it in our drinking water be tolerated.
Y, Eugene P. Dolum, in his widely used textbook, TUNDAMENTALS OF ECO l'
"Should a system receive a higher level of radiation than that says:
' under which it evolved, nature will not take it ' lying down,' so to speak; adaptations and adjustnents will occur along with elimination of t
l sensitive strains or species."
t Put another ways radioactive waste dumped into.the Mississippi vill l
result in mutations.or freaks in plants, animals, fish and people.
No limits have Cancer and the death rate,due to cancer will increase'.
I been set on the increase of illness and death that is " acceptable."
i That will apparently depend on how loud people protest as they learn
'. what is happending.-
Is is necessary to discharce radioactive waste into the Mississipoi River?_
f Q.
f "Tho quantity of radioactive wastes which is discharged depends on, j
l A.
NO.
the extent of the waste treatment system. ' Radioisotopes in tho wast.cs can vary from none to several million Curies per year., There need be no l
p radioactive discharge since those that are released are the result of deliberata decisions.. The only gain offse'tting these. releases is au slightly lower, and as yet l
jI-7.
1 l
l\\~
~
jk
$h l
4
I,
~. -
4
.-~*-4,,
- .y~'
h.
1 4.. ;\\. _ _.
.s. (y
- . 1,. i.
7 I
(N
~
(3)
Q.
What can you do?
A.
Make your voice heard. Don't leave it to the other guy. Protest now 1
against dumping radioactive wasto in any amount into the Mississippi l
Aiver or any other body of water in Minnesota.
/
Send your protest tor 4
/
. Governor Harold LeVander, State Capitol Bidg., St. Paul, Minnesota'
,,r, ',,
'". Mayor Arthur Naftalin, Minneapolis Court House, Minnoapolis, Minnesota
. You'r own State Legislator, State Capitol Bldg., St. Paul, Minnesota
. Mr. John Badalich, Chairman - Pollution Control Agency, Department h
of Health Building, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 4
ATTEND POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY MEETING (Permit for NSP will be granted or denied at this meeting)
Tuccday, March 11
- Votorans Service Building 9:00 AM Capitol Approach - St. Paul 1
5.
ki SourceMateri$11 0.
(1) United States Atomic Encrgy Commission, " Operating History of U. S. Nuclear Roactors"
~
(
'(2), Robert Cunningham Fadeley, " Oregon Malignancy Pattern Physiograph-ically Related to Hanford Washington Radioisotopo Storage,"
,[
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH, May-June, '65 1[,
(3)' R. E. Pogue and D. E. Abrahamson, " Benefits, Risks, and Regulations,",
l JOURNAL OF MINNESOTA ACADEMY OF SCIENCE, Vol. 35, No. 1, 1968.
t c
(4) Abrahamson and Pogue, " Discharge of Radioactive and Thcrmal
(
Wastes," JOURNAL OF MINNESOTA ACADEMY OF_ SCIENCE, Vol. 35, No. 1, i
1968.-
~
3 i
f.
,'e 1
s.
Prepared and Distributed by Russell Hatling, 2nd ',;ard 4
l
_ ___ a