ML20127N679

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Staff Comments on Questions Raised in Constituent Rept Re Operation of Plant
ML20127N679
Person / Time
Site: Monticello 
Issue date: 06/05/1969
From: Seaborg G
US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To: Mccarthy E
SENATE
References
NUDOCS 9212010370
Download: ML20127N679 (19)
v • d • e


Text

~

_-._s-_.

J f

4-s

/V n

..g

n. g

{

m 8 25' #t p/

',/

2(3 Ibnorable Eugene J. McCarthy United States Senate Dear Senator McCarthy

'nank you for your letter of April 8,1969, enclosing a copy of a letter arxi a report concoming proposed operation of the Monticello Ibelear Generating Plant which you received frun Mr. Russell lhtling, Minneapolis, Minnesota.

I am enclosing AEC staff carments on the questions raised by Mr. Hatling in his report which he circulated at the DIP City Cmenition in Minreapolis. Por your convenient refennce, a copy of Mr. Ihtling's report is enclosed, with the respective passages keyed by ntmber to the pertinent IEC corments.

Begarding the licensing status of the Monticello plant, the AEC regulatory staff has u.%tr review an application by ;the !bIthem States Power Ccapany for an operating license. I am enclosing a sh:xrt statement prepamd by the AEC staff on the status of the plant and evaluations of mdiological effects frcan its pmposed opemtion.

If you should need further infomation on this subject, please let me know.

CorrH n11y,

@ tw L S#

Chaiman Enclosums:

1.

AEC Caraments on Mr. Ihtl.ing's questions 2.

Cy of Mr. lIntling's Eeport 3

Radiolcgical Effects of Operating RETIYPED 'IO CAPITALIZE "C" IN CY OF ENCIOSURE 2. AND 'IO PLTT ON ONE LINE Khe Monticello Nuclear Gemra

-p 7 Plant w/ attached booklet "MR. HATLING" IN FIRST SENTENCE OF SECOND PARAGRAPH. SEP ATTACHPD YRT, TOW SEE PAGE 2 FOR DISTR 11UPION & NUPE FOR PREVIOUS CONClWtENCES OGC D :D DIR:DRL 00 omer >

DIR.:.R.PS.

.. 2'

~~~

~ ~ ~

'~~~

e PAMorris

. @. stem

. or note on,;

$... J.NPA 5/8/69_,___ fpurz767* )&_5/gj/69, su m m >

,, /,,, /69,

S/

/6e 5

S/23/69 5.c.ns (nev.9-ss) ncx eno

~~..

.....J....

m i... -

-.n 9212010370 690605 PDR ADOCK 05000263 H

PDR

7 7g

~ l ~'

D., -

- g, Distrh'tkon: ' '

,f,*-

q,',

W,3 (2)

Y Connissioner Ramey I' ' '

Conmissioner Tape Commissioner Jetmoon Cannissioner Costegiola' g, 3 g a

Ahs[ glen..Mgr.[(2M(2)J

-r w

? ^ J0en Council

.I M9lam r

W (2) h lith, 00-y CIEenderson.

4 WGDooly %

Menenble Eugens J. Neder#F Westem 5 thited States Senate PAMorris i

l'KShapar Dear Sena Macarthy*

PDR (50-26 oca

'Ihark you f your letter of April 8,1969, enclosing a of a letter and a scre.dyg prgd opemtim of the

. imello Nuclear Generat Plant which you received from Mr..Bt 11 Hat 13ry;,

Mirvicepolis, Minnen I am enclosing AEC star umits on the questions byh Gatlirv3 his mport whic he circulated at the II City conventiet

~

w nu.

eelis. Por your c ent afergmoe, a of Mr. Nat11rg's repert is attached, with the pective passages eyed by number to the pertinent AEC corments.

Megardirs the licenairg status of Mantiae plant,-the ABC regulatos7 staff has moer rwiew an application

'!he hu States Pouer Compary for en opemting license. I am enclos a

statement gropared by.

i the ABC staff on the status of the plant evaluatic.1s of radiological effnets fNa its preposed @eration.

If you should need further infomation this feet,'please let me know.

?K7TE; Draft AEC ccrments on N IFe Hatling's questions recid.

fm. DOS (FJShon, AASchoen, IFSoule) ard IEyr (A.TPressesky, WPGanmill)

Chairaan Enclosurwe:

1.

- ABC ocument.s en W. Ind11mg's aestions

/

2.

f W. Hat 11rg's/twport 3.

eal Effbets of Opemting

'the Monticello Nuclear Generatirs Plant CO -Kornblith

-5/-/69 b

m ooc m

IE ocR m,u,

....-....y/..j dw

. - - =

IUPrice sunwr >

DATT > 9/J.Mh.....$

h9-

=5./df9.

--.5/J9 -.- --.-W..-4--

. 4--./69=

AEC-318 (Rev.9 53) AICM 0240 e a.evenemesi emmens aaeocs i esse e-ses..it t

e

+

e--

..m..#,,

-,--nm.w.m,y,..,-yf-9

,,,9

-,y..y,,

,i.-%-.y

..,-c,-

,y

.n-w..

W

' ;n e

(

Ilonorable Eugene J. McCartly

Distribution:

Chaintan (2) l Ccnmissioner Ramey Canmissioner Johnson Cannissioner Costagliola General Manager (2) 000 (2)

Seemtary (2)

Congress 1orni (2)

H. L. h*1ce C. K. Beck M. M. Kann C. L. llenderson R. L. Doan j

F. J. Shon, DOS A. A. Schoen, DOS H. F. Soule, DOS A. J. Pmssesky, PJ1f W. P. Ganmill, RUI orr s i s ern k

W L. D. Low Public Docunent Room (50-263)- C[(. asd 9/M/'f' n/ew/ /

0. Ertter (DR-2116)

IKTTE: Draft AEC Cormants on Hatling's questions ree'd fm F. J. Shon, H. F. Soule, and A. A. Schoen, DOS; A. J. Pressesky ard W. P. Ganu111, RDT NOTEY Howard Shapar, B. Schur, & G. Iladlock from 000 have signed off on letters to Sen. Mondale and Rep. Fraser which contain d M W identical enclosure. Format Western has also s16ned off on the 1tra to Mondale & Fraser.

4 OFFICE >

$URNA84E >

AATE>

Form AEC-Ste (Rev. 9-53) AECM 0240 v a son.mman, nrense ones - use e-an+

. -=

- ---- ~.

~

p AEC 00t4477PS ON OUFRPION AND ANSWER COf@IIATION PREPARED BY PR. RUSSETL HATLING.

f MINNFAPOLIS MINUFFOPA CONCERNING RADIOAC'PIVITY REIF.ASFA FROM TFE K)tIPICEUA NUCIEAR GENERATING PINIP '

Mr. Hatling calls the safety record of nuclear energy plants " dismal."

1.

To the contrary, the safety reconi of nucicar energy plants has been out-standing. The AEC has licensed the operation of 114 nower research, and testing reactors which have accunulated a total of about 7$0 reactor-years of operation without a radiation fatality or serious radiation exposure.

Within this total, 17 reactors were constructed for the generation of electric nower. %cce nuclear power plants, about which Mr. Hatling is primrily concerned, have comoiled a record of about 90 reactor-years of operatirm experience. We know of no instance where the operation of these licensed clants has resulted in exposure of any nonber of the public to

+

radiation levels exceeding annual limits specified in AEC regulations, which are desirned for protection of the public.

2.

We are not.certain of the basis used by Mr. Hatling in referring to eight "of the origimi 12" nucicar power plants as having " failed." As noted above, 17 central station nucienr electric power plants have been licensed for coeration to date. A number of the early power reactors were. srall prototypes built for research and development under coonerative programs between the AFE and electric utilities. %ey constituted an imoortant step in the R O nrocess toward develonnent of deoendable and economical nuclear olants for the production of electricity, including exploration of the feasibility or different tynes of reactors. Doeration of five of these plants has been termimted. They are: Hallam Nuclear Power "acility, Hallam, Nebr.: Carolinas-Viminia Tube Reactor, Varr, S.C. ; the Pathfinder Atmde Power Plant, Sioux Falls, S. Dak.; Dieua Nuclear Power vacility, Pinua, Ohio; and the Boiling Nuclear Superheat Peactor, Punta Hiruera, Puerto Rico. While there were operating difficulties with each of these reactors, i

no public health and safety oroblem ever arose from their coeration, shut-down, or diswintiing. Of the reminim 12 nucicar Dower plants now licensed to operate, nine are currently-generating electricity, including the first five to be licensed by the AEC. Two are undergoing repairs:

the Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant in Michigan and the Elk River Nucicar Plant in Minnesota. W e twelfth plant, Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant in New Jersey, has only recently been authorized to connence coeration at Iow power 1cvels.

%e Elk River plant, which Mr. Hatling reports as having failed, recently exocrienced an operating difficulty after nearly six years of oneration.

A smil leak was detected in a 11/2-inch reactor water Icvol monitoring i

line which is wolded to the unner cortion of the Elk River reactor pressure vessel. The licensee has conducted an extensive inspection of other pipirg i

connected to the vessel, and the results are being evaluated. Scre-i 4

- = = - _ _ _ _ _ _ -

^

7-r--w+".

vrse.--m-+,-.m..,---+n,-e,---,,,

mr.-,.---r-.g-+--

m-~

--,--m-r.e--.

,-c-y--a--.i.,-

- + --- ---,-. -

y.r.i-

+-

---<.rv--

,,-4.<-.-++re-t--+

9r-<

+-w-w

-w e s

,w-*r<=

~.

7_,

sir.ilar m1 functions have occurred in the operation of other nuclear power plants; none ins resulted in a radiation ir11ury to any employee or posed a threat to public health and safety.

From all the reconds available to us, the radioactivity $n effluent releases from licensed power reactors, including those from the Pathfinder plant

?

referred to in W. Hat 11m's remrks, has been below the limits that would be pomissibic under the AEC regulations in Part 20 of Title 10, Chanter 1, f

Code of Federal Regulations, " Standards for Protectico Against Radiation."

Tne release linits in AEC regulations are based on duides develooed by the Federal Radiation Council and apnroved by the President for the guidance of Federal agencies. These ruides are ccanatible with reccerendations of the Natiomi Council on Radiation Protection and Peasurerents and the Intermtiorni Ccomission on Radioicalcal Protection. The radioactivity that my be released in effluent water frcn a nuclear reactor consists of a mixture of radioisotopes or different vnximum permissible concentrations.

An analysis of this mixtw'e was cerformd at the Pathfirrier olant by the licensee during 1967, the last year of operation of this clant.

It showed that average concentrations of radicactivity in the effluent water were less than one cercent of the AEC Part 20 Jinit, based on the actual radio-isotopic ecoposition. Releases of radicactivity in gaseous effluents frcrn the Pathfinder plant durinn 1907 were less than 10 percent of aonlicable 11 nits srecified in the onerating licence.

3.

Any nuclear facility either built for the AEC or aoproved as a licensed facility must reet rigorous safety standants, and is kept under continued surveillance throuchout its lifetire for ourooses of safety.

The first production reactors at Hanford were a wartime effe. t built for military purooses by the former Fanhattan Encineer District. After the Ato-Je Energy Cormission was cotablished in January 1947, the Ccemission continued and exnanded operation of the Hanford facility for military purpases, but undertook an extensive progran to reduce releases or radic+

act_vity to the environment. Substantjal reductions were made. Extensive environmental studies indicate that at no time since the production operations began at Hanford in 1944 have the concentrations of radioactivity in the Columbia River exceeded levels specified in the nationally established starrianis for controlling exposure to people.

4; The clains made in the article in the Pay, Tune 1965 issue of the Journal of Envir_on3ntal Health were answered in an article in Public Health Reoorts, April 1900, by.Tohn C. Pailar III and John L. Young, Jr., of the National i

Cancer Institute.

A copy of this ai'ticle, " Oregon Palignancy Pattern and Radioisotope Storage - A Reappraisal," de enclosed. Reporting on an independent study of cancer statistics from 1934 to 1963, it concludes t' hat "no evidence was found that persons living downstream from the Hanfoi'd Preserve or a?ong the Pacific coast of Oregon have had an excess risk of death from cancer in general or fron leukemia in particular."

t m,

, e uw,

~

-.n-.---.-

g n

5 The Atomic Energy Act of 1954 charged the Atcmic Energy Ccruission with the role of encouraging an expanded civilian program of peaceful uses of atcmic energy "to the maximtri extent consistent with the ccrmon defense and security and with the health and safety of the public." 1hus, the 1

AEC regards the protection of public health ard safety as an overriding consideration in the licensing and regulation of nucicar reactors.

a The AEC regulatory function is carried out independently frctn the Ccrmission's i

operational and developrental activities. Three organizational units below l

the Cornission level participate in the licensing and regulation of nuclear power reactors. These are the AEC regulatory staff, which includes pro-fessional personnel in mny technical disciplines; the Advisory Occrittee on Reactor Safeguards, a statutory body of highly qualified scientists and engineers; and atcmic-cafety and licensing boards, drawn fran a panel of technically qualified experts and persons experienced in administrative procedures to conduct oublic hearings and issue initial decisions on licensing applications. None of these units has any operating or pro-motional responsibilities, and each group is independent of the others, Their sole responsibility is in the field of nuclear safety and related regulatory mtters. Details of the licensing and regulations pmcess are contained in the enclosed booklet, " Licensing of Power Reactors."

6.

Throughout history, man has been confronted with the problen of balancing risk avainst benefit in many walks of life. Many risks are so sr.all that, while they cannot be reduced to absolute zero, the effort that would be' recuired to further reduce them could not be justified.

Independent cormittees of scientists have been continuously active in seekina to define safe practice in the use of mn-mde radiation, and the AEC has followed procedures to ensure that the best scientific advice available is utilized.

To place in persocctive the use of mn-mde radiation, it should be noted I

that the humn race has ahenys been subject to exnosure to radiation from natural sources -- radicnctivity in the crust of the earth, cosmic rays # rom outer space, and naturally occurring radioactive ratorials in the body.

At-rest locations on the, earth's terrain, the total exposure fran such sou cos exceeds 125 millirems per year. Additional exposures that would result from proposed reicaces of mdioactivity to the Mississippi River frcm the operation of the Monticello reactor would be very smil fractions of this leveh 7.

This statement seems to imply that an X-ray exposure of an unborn child would be smil cornared to the exposum an unborn child might receive cver i'

a pericd of severa'l nonths as a res' ult'of the proposed releases frcxn the Monticello reactor to the Mississioni River. Such an 11nolication is not correct, The evidence for a possible increase in the incidence of leukemia p

resulting frce X-ray exandnation of the obstetrical abdomen of the mother I

t Rem stands for " roentgen eouivalent mn" - a reasure of the dose of ionizing radiation tci body tissues, roughly caual to a dose of one roentgen of high voltage X-rays. A millirem is one-thousandth of a ren.

e

_m,,.~.,

.w-

,,---..,,.c

,..m

.~.,

,n y

v.-_

y

=.v:

I relates to exposures of the unborn child ranging from 50 to 5.000 millirems.

As noted in 6, above, exposures to ocopie (including unborn children) that could be expected from radioactive material in the river would be nuch less than such levels. Further, the fact that X-ray exposures occur in a period less than a second is believed to make them rcre hazardous than, f dis-tributed over lonr r periods of tire.

8.

Under reccmendations of the Federal Radiation Council (FRC), maxinm exposures of a population group that could occur from radioactivity in water would be less than one-third of the level cuoted by Mr. Hatling.

Tne FRC further reccerenis that, within such limits, exoosures be kept as low as practicable. Thus, there is no "FRC standard dose."

As irdicated in connection with several of Mr. Hatling's staterents, the exposures that could be expected to occur fram releases of radjoactivity frce the Monticello recctor to the river are ruch lower than the Lyel cited by Mr. Hatline..

l Any health risks asnociated with exposures as low as those under dis-cursion are too rrall to be detemined by obse"vaticn or experiment and can only be inferred by extranolation from observcole effects of exposures that are far hirher.

'"he nethod of extracolation comonly uced, is to assum that at these very low icvels, the ratio of dose to effect is the sane as at very high levels. This assumotion is considered by rest i

radiobiologists to provide reasonable estinates of upper limits of the resultant incidence of disease in a large population rather than actual values. There in reason to believe that the actual incicience at these low levels nny be much lower than estinated upper limits.

9.

It nny be noted that the source of the staterent that Northern States Power estimates a total waste, including fuel Icaks, of 91.4 curies yearly is attributed to an article by nembers of the faculty of the University of Minnesota printed in the Journal of the Minnesota Acadenly of Science.

Discussions with Northern States Power suggest that this estimate is based on a statement by Northern States Power that in a single day the anount of radioactivity in 11auid wastes released from the reactor could possibly go un to 0.25 curie. Apparently, the authors have assumed that it is the exLectation of Northern States Power to release this much activity daily durinr, the entire year. Neither we nor Northern States anticipate that i,

annual releases of liquid effluents will approach anounts comparable to h

91.4 curies.

a

[

Mr. Hatling also attributes to the Journal of the Minnesota Academy of Science a staterent that the General Electric Ccmpany " guesses 30,000 h

curies" of radioactivity would be discharged into the htississippi River the first year from the Ponticello plant. We are not able to find such an estinate by General Electric.

L 4

a

5-

10. The curie is the basic unit adopted to express ar:unts of radioactivity in tems of the number of atorrde disintegrations ner second, and equals the number of disintegrations per socord in the radioactivity of a gram of

,j radium. This does not mean, however, that'one curie of a particular radioisotope is equivalent to one curie of another in any other respect.

s It indicates nothing about the varying kinds and strengths of radiation emitted by different kinds of radioactive mterials. For examole, reccmended mxinri concentrations in drinking water, measured in. curies per unit volume, range up to a rtillion ti:nes higher for tritium than for radium. Tne properties of radium are such that oublic health authorities are concerned if only a few nillir=.ms of it are lost or misplaced. The cited attempt to co care the radioactivity in releases frcri nuclear Dower pknte durirt routine operations with "the activity of the entire world supply of radium" has no validity, and is altogethe'r misleadinr as to the rehtive innertance of the two.

11. Levels of radiation under which ecological systems have developed are renerally of the order of 100 to 150 nillirems per year, but there are sizable inhabited areas in Brazil, India, and at least one island in the Pacific in which natural Icvels of radiation are many times higher. By i

comparison General Electric Company han estimted that radioactivity released to the Micsissiopi River during operation of the Monticello plant would increase the radiation exoosure of animis and clants using the water by very small fractions of the lowe'st levels occurring in nature.

We are confident that Dr. Odum (not Dolum) was not concerned with such minute increases when he was writing of the effects of higher levels of radiation on strains or species of animls.

12. The number of curies rentioned in the quotation is not relevant to the question of discharge of radioactivity frcn the Monticello plant to the Mississiepi River. The question of balance between reduction in levels of radioactivity released and effort to achieve such reduction has been discussed in Item 6, above.

Enclosures:

1.

Article, " Oregon Maligmney Pattern and Radioisotooe Storage - A Reappraisal" 2.

Booxlet,'" Licensing of Power Reactors" I

f f

I I

i 4

.. -, -. -. ~

y,.

w 33 p),_%y;

/K.)

l t

p__

1

~-

O(V '

., s.p

(:

t (N:

! !.y,' 1% 'a.i v ul4 Yohtme 81-Number 4 l

hf t

..tw

) )p..bi' D

k.p" i :,i. k, h.., ;7l.,.,,;

0.1 APMDL 10GG__

O i

v 3

yi

~.Q}.gg)[p.y ra.w.u.am 1

s_

I 4

. 3, 3 L_. _.

._.J Pup

' laolation of pathogenic lep;ospires from waters used for tecrea tion..

299-4..

Stanley Is. Diench used IT'illiam F.1(cCulloch 4

305' llealth aml.afety in ummer camps........,.........

)

Paul B. Stanilonis and Roger J. ?leyer Oregon mnlignancy pattern and radirsisotope storage A

C,, N '2 ' 3 h. g g reapprai<al. '.

311

'1 John C. Dallar ilI and John L.1 oung. Jr.

Itapid biochemical pre.tunptive test for gonorrhcal urethri.

tis in the male......

........................<.i 318 A. J1. H. PcJersen und R. E. Kelly t

llcalth and planning department efforts in a community re.

323

. newal program... o.

.~..~.....,,...~..o......,

Lanc!! E. Dellin Prevalence of amblyopia ;....... '.....................

329 Menon C. Flom and Richard W. Neumaler.

Speech fletects and mental retardation. Survey in Oregon. - - 343 Robert W. Bla1.cley t

j hiental hygiene seminars for school per*6onnel. lleport of a 348

_ j pilot project.....

Ghislaine D. Codenne fHfdg

/g#%

llesearch in health services. Conference report..........-

351 24-;"k 1 Marcus Rosenblum-

,y continued D. ;

f; Onhplocousa.w-- ; a -

l This pherracey of the 1090's is pcrt of the permenent exh!' alt of E

mecilrol history which openod this raonth in the Museurn of His-

  • s tory and Techno!ccy, Smithsonlon Institution, Wcshington, D.C.

~2seithsentan hastitutten photograph.

i

  • N' w+ e

=-e.

-4,w

w. ::o rn-4.-- -<~y s-J4

~.4-1

~, _

~

v--,

.o.2

,. ~,.

e t

- e

,A

[,

(h A lhappraisal u*

p'%

m

/j?

Oregon Malignanby' Pattern and Radioisotope Storage JOHN C. CAllAlt til, M.D., and JOHN L. YOUNG, Jr., M.P.H.

t l

A N INClm.\\610D mortality rate for cancer, ported excen risk was present before the Han.

  • -l ti. Including leukenia particidarly, among ford Atomic Energy Facility started operation.

, Oregon re idems near the south bark of the G. No study was made of caneer mortality Colmohia Ever or along the Pacifle Coa t was

.ates along the north bank of tho' Cohnnbia.

I reponed treently by Fadeley (1). This would

!!iver, which is in the State of Washington.

he an important ob'ervation if it were con-firmed, becau+e there is an increase in thn radio-Method of Analysis active euntent of water wideh flows through or T d m r mdlin th nd Md '

pas the linnford (h adungton).\\tomic Stor-mom mk M of coundu in Oii'-

age Prer.erce bef ore,it is carried downnream g g. g g

g g,g gg paa the are.i, which Fadeley reported to have ed by A indiw medd M for l

high mortEity rates. Neanse of the following dihmm hmm coundes in dm y and n features of h,is report, however, we have re-a-composition of the population (table 1 and fig.

ammed the quntion.

Tim W50 observed mortality raten for.all 1 Several inland countie. were omit ted with-fonas of cancer and for leukemia in the U.S.

out exphmat mu m the nnalym.

&p dade O') mm taken u andmd.

.t lla,ac unta (manbcrs of death) were not F de pm plor to D-D, the rates include a relmrted, and randmn m'intions of rMes cal-sraall adjustment for ditierences in cause.of-cidated on the suall muuhers of death < occur-deadmdgmnents in the fourth, fifth, and dxth rmg m omgle counties were not considered.

revidons of the International Clasification of

3..\\1though the age and sex structure of the y

,g3 populaimn vanes from one county to unmher' llecause the NGO nonwhite populations were the rates were neither ago adjusted nor sex rather small in Oregon (2.11ercent) and Wash-80 "*'"d' Ington (3.0 percent.), no adjustment was made 3

3

4. The fact that throughout the L.. d States fg.acJ TM numbers of deaths on which the mte and in many other cottutries canter mortality rate in table 1 are based are shown in tablo 2.

rates are higher in cities than in rural areas Table 3 lists the counties included in each (2,3) was not mentioned. The river and Pacific area, and figmv 9 shows the boundarica of the.

counties genendly are more densely populated counties and county groups. Cotmtles in the than the inlaiul counties, a nd, on this basis, they

.Veiropolitan Portland area' were' considered might he expected to have higher rates.

separately from the other river counties because S. No study was made of cancer mortality of the ditterent cancer risk between urban and data from earlier years to determine if the re.

rural nivasin general (U).

The age-sex. adjusted mortality rates for all The cuthors are with the lliometry tranch, National forms o_f capect and the numbers of deaths Canier Institute, Public Health Serrig.,

upon which these rates were based for Oregon UI Yul. 81. No. 4. April 1966

' * ~ N Punee I

WW

='

k?

t

.i.

M e

nnd Wuhington nii shown by county.in tables in both States have lucrened raphily in recent 4 an;l S. We did not inefudo a similar tabuln.

yenrs, the inenue has been about the enmo as tion of leukemin mortality in thii re. port be-in the Itst of the United States. Interwringly, e

i

' g j

cause the numbers of deaths in most counties the escens in leukemin mortality existed before the Laford Preserve began operatim in IDE wele epdte t, mall.

4 i

i Second, total cancer mortality rates in the Rowlts Podland region.of Oregon have remained es.

sent'11y unchanged since 1985. Mortality in Several trends are clear from figure 1. Fhst, y.,

total cancer mortality rates in Oregon nnd the nyer counties has inerensed up to the Stato i

Washington have been consistently lower than average, but remains substantin11y below.that the average rato for the U.S. white population, for the entire United States, and mortal!ty in In contrat, leukemia mortality rates in both the ocean counties has netually declined. In j

States have been above nycrage for as long u Wohington total cancer mortality in the river data by coimiy are available (1940 in Oregon counties has been consistently lower than in i

and 1004 in Wuhington)..\\hhough the rates other parts of the State, krtality rates for Tah!c 1.

Lrin11ty tr.les $ per 100,000 populatloa for all forr.u of cancer rud for leukemla l

In the United Staics, Oregon, u.d Ws.shington,in various time periods I

Area 1934-37 ' 103%-42 194b 47 IDWS2 1953-67 1035.G:1 i

I All fonna of ennect l

1 l

Total l'nhed b tat er '......... /

145 6,

14 0. G,

lh 2 143 8 1 144,0j s 141. g t-

' _ ~ _ _ _ _ _. -

j f

130. 5 !

132. ?,

i 129, y l 1

Or Van....

  • 12 N <

s jg4 3 jgi A 127.3 131. 4 4 13:t 7 i

it iur t onat ica....,

  • 111. o '
  • 12,k A 110. 7 oc ea n cua nt i4 >............
  • 1:Lt. 4 8120.3 11:55 121. A 12;t 6 l 101. 8 Purdand untatics.......
  • 143. o s 137, 3,

la 3 140, p 33g i j g ag,4 I nla nd raunt ies..,..........i

  • 112,7 8 121. C >

12a 3 11R 8 122.6 12.L $ -

Wu.l.lugt on....

.......i 144.8 INL 7 ;

130. 2,

13h. O 139, 3 13A 5 lH ver coauties............

121 4 121. 5 6 101 0 114.4 I 121 0 12A. U Ocean coundes....

!?d 3 12d 5 ;

l'X 7,

1% 8 I 127. 2 131 7

.l 121 0-1:N. 4 1 J 4,1 134.D !

12.*C 1 137.5 Portland countle........

l uland cou ntics................

149.I lh N 131,b 136. J 144 0 13V. 7 D

Leukemia I

Total United States '........

3. 4 l
4. 2
4. 0,

0.1

6. 8 s 7. 0

(*)

i

't8

5. 3 '

&2

7. 4
7. O Oregoh.

luver count ies...............

'4 14,8

4. 9
5. 5
7. 3
7. 9 Oc ea n counties................
  • )

l

' 5. D

4. 2 62 R1

&2

' $. 0

6. 9
7. 0
7. 5
8. 3 Portland c ou nties................

(*)

l 83.4

3. 7
5. 3
7. O
i. 3 I nla nd cotm tles................

(*)

Wa 4 hhm t o n......................

  • 3.1
4. I

!L 4 6.1 C. 9

7. 4 nlver counties...................

83.3

2. 7
4. 0
7. 2 n.1

&1 Ocean cou n t ics...................

  • 3.1
L 7
4. !
4. 0
4. 8
7. I Portland counties..............
  • 1.1
3. 2
7. 4 ;
7. 6
6. 7
7. 4 I n!.md c os,mtles...............

8 'A 2

4. 3
5. 3 C. I
7. 2
7. O s Itates adjusted for ago and ses by the indirca method, taking US 1950 observed rates for males and fernales in 10. year age groups as s.tandard.

8 ILten for white population only.

+

u

Itatea for 105 4 02.
  • Unter, for 1935 only.

+

' 6 Itatein for 1039-42.

nibble for these yents.

8 Leukennia deaths b1910-42.y county not -

1 Itates for

  • llates based on leukemia dentbs.in 1035 r.nd 1037 only. 1.eukemia deaths not available by county for 1034 and NO..

Public IIcalth Reports' 312

+

' at av -

" ' ' ' ~ ~ ~

~M**

-tr'*y

~v.r.

  • s

.,q.

7,,,3w,,,i.,,,

n p

g Figure 1.

Annunt mortality rctes per 100,000 populadon for all forms of c2ncer end far leukemia, United States, Oregon, and Washington,1935-60 g ga i j

5d Att f ot#As of C ANCIR WASHINGTON 200 OREGON 150 g#

-. N ' ;' ;;; i... t :*.s * *

  • 8 : ' * %.* l,',*.*.* : b * *

% ;.........***** @ h*.h Nf/

,,a..**,..,' %,* 6 4 %% u'n ::.* '. *

.. - - - f- ).:~ w" ~ ~'

J s

~'Qy&,.r,3

/

i 100 u '

I o

LIUKf MI A

9

.[

5',

.,/,/... ',

....... '..,' A.

c.

,...........w::.-....

y..I*'r....,

8,

','t

,.1

\\

l 1

e l

. \\'.

I t

,f.*.

N

/

a g

't*

[

~

  1. ~ ~

l

//*

1

., 6

.'2 o

6.*

/

a

.\\

t *)

/

i

4 *.*

i

\\

/..)

..h 4

0

l f'.

t 1

.% **a.l, }

n' l

lj

.r.:. w.

/ /

s

  • ~ ~

.t f;***,e. p'

/

y.

p

,. \\ /

\\/

/

V

/

/.l o/

4 r.? p

  • River covatles 3

= a

Oceen counties

.... Fortiond creo counties

- Inland counties -

$ lote Solol

U.S. w hit e t

mv 2

I I

1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 Year Nott:.Wallal.le leutNnia snortality data for Itcr.40 are ghown in tables 1 and 2.

Yo!. 81, No. 4, April 1966 313

-+-.--*+~~e.,.-,w-.w.-....-

4,....

....._-_.,,,,,o%,,,.

g

,.p.g,,,.

4_

-r

'I

E*

the en an counties liato aho been generally low, but in the Inoi,t lecent period 1103-03) they Tnnda la mortality rate. for lenkemia are weie the lowest hi the State.

mnewhat Ica cientsnt than tituds for total In Washington leukemia mariality rates in 4

cancer becanso of the small muabers of deaths t he river counties luctra6ed raphily before IW,0,

  • In mno nivaw. In Oregon leukemin anrtality but they have actually decreased since that time inclva ed at about the national averngo in the while rates in other patis of the Stato and in l'ortinnd area, slightly inster in river counties,. the total United States were rising. Leub and cren faster in tho inland counties. Rates motiality' rates in the ocean counties also have for the ocean counties have fluctuated widely, inercased rapidly sineo 104,,b'ut the increae A

Tuhle 2.

Numbere of deaths from all forms of enneer end from leukemia in the Unlied 2

States, Oregon, aml Wo.hh:glon, in various ihne geerkds 4

Area

} 193b37 103s-42 5 1N3-47 1019722 }

8 t

1053-$7 1 10$$-03

.f i

I l

+

All forms of cancer I.

Total l'nlied 6tatu'...

527,001 731 045 o24,849 I'9G9,037j 1,102,270 l

  • 1,200,301 g.

Onuou.

...

  • 1. 2.N 8 5. M *.

- b,659 j 10,2h l 11, 641 {

15,A32 ltivi r rorntica.

  • l ua -

8 *i21 Gs2.

MA.

092 1, 314 Occ.in w o.:le...

  • 174
  • 751 '

1,119 !

1. 456 1,74g1 )

2, 36%

Poritarl emndirs.

  • boa
  • 2,7^6 2, son l; 4,29A 4,Db4

$,495 {

7, A:.4 ti.tnai ema.iim...

4 3ao

  • bN C
2. 901 i 3, aos,

4, 0n L*hinnlou.

A.6il 12.127 13,000 e 10,462 l 19,130 23,352 ltiver rein,t ira......

Oma n co au t*..

t *.

  • si 6h x43 ;

1, u6s j 1, Sol 755 1, usu 1,221 1,421 j 1,445,

1, 9 *n 1%n tmd r.nna les..... ~..

294 34S 4:14 !

L41 <

$90 A ',7 bdaadr#unies..

' 7, 2* O 10,109 11,3s7 '

13, 047 !

10,0a4 l

'21,024 1

1 i

t 1,cukenda Li 4

i Tou.1 l*nited blatu 8 la.796

22. usa 30,246 '

41,470 ;

31,030.l 8 $$, *,hin Orr an....

.i 6

f 170 354 s 4s4 04%

673 1 !vt r conniira,..

........I N

  • lli 30
M S4 74 Ocean r> maim..

..............J M

i da l 44 70 121 127 Ponland romaien......

N f si j 100 234' 2^0 ;

diK l uland countics..............J M

t au,

a

$32 39:; *

. ga4 L hington.......

.I 5 94 abi 4 573 745 041 l 1,342 1Nvt r cou nt h*..........

'b 14 31 59 O mm emm t le................

'10 ~

U2 l

$2 l SG 75 Pon t.u.d coun t ic8...............

39 50 l DO

'I !

R, 25 32 }

31 45 Inhind count ks....

8Mi 311 476 602 1, 123 l

004 l3 t Lunbers which were reponed. Ikfore the rates were calenh.ted for tablo 1, cotoparability ration were npplied to adjust for di:Terences in caue.of.<h ath ru.4ignments twtween the 4th, 5th, and 6th revimlons Intermaional Cl.eincation of Diseases.

s White population only.

  • Data for 1958-02.
  • Data for 1935 onl
  • Data for 103%42.y.
  • D ua not availablo by county.

i Data for 1940-42.

FTotalinchides one with count

  • Data for 1935 nud 19a7 only. y of ruMenco unknown.Lenkemia denib4 not.4vaCable

_l Saracts: 0 cecu lenkeniin deaths by county fr 1040-57 nad deaths due to all forms of caneer by cl-1 10-11-44 were, obtained fraat the Staic Ile.datra, Oreym Shao lioard of linIth. Ponland. Washim: ton leukemia deaths by county for 1935 and 1037-57 and deaths due to all fonns of cancer for 1934,100G-38, and 1941-44 were obtained from nunual vohun;;,es of Yital dtutistics of the Ur.ited States.obtained from the The remainder of the data were i

[

314 Puldie IIcahh Itcrorts 4s.--=-7*

=.m..-

  • --~ " ^'

.ei.,.

g

~~"'

=

f..., A....

jS es 9}

(J) llaennel. W., apre um,14, c., and Zhnn.i rr r.12. U. :

lu the Unllest Nintes. 1910 1040.

U.S. Govern.

Pancer umrbhlly in urbnu and turnt ]nwn.

onent L'rinting 0 llec. Washington. D.C.,1947, 1*ll:4 l'ub!! cation Nti. ditt a l'uhlle llealth if ne-tC) Eph vhnnu. 3!. t Introductinu to dennagruphy.

A gra ph No. 37J.

U.8.

Goveruluent Printing The &wlety of Attunties, Cidcago, IDM.

yQ om<+, Wn hington, ILC.,1050.

(7) Ontdnu. T., Crittenden. 31., atul !!ntnosel. W.I

4) lilli, A.11.1 l'rluc!ples of tuedical stait. les. 1 d. 7.

Purwtr suurtullty trends fu the Unitest Ftates.

g' Oxford t*niveraltr.Preu. London.1 Dill.

Nnt Cunar Inst Stour.gr 0.

U.S. Oorerntnent G) Linder, l'. and Grove, II.11.2 Vital stallaties rutes 1*rinting Oftkt. Washington, D.C '1001.

C Tahlo 4.

Mortality rates per 100,000 populallon c.nd nurnbers of deaths for all forms of cancer by county, in various tinte perlot!s, Oregon l

ltates l

Nutubr te I

Count y j

i i

s 1943-l 19 % ' 10'!3-l l

j 11435 103 %

i IP?& ' 1933 103>l1013-1945-1053-1953-

, 42, 47 52 57 03 -

42 i 47 52 j 57 C3 4

I i

._ _{

I l

l j

]Wi I

f f

f t, L t.op 130.5 l '.; 2. 9 1 i fi d 157. A 151 0 141. 3 t 20 125 ) I10 225 l ?G9 31%

163 N.u n. n i.6.....'11Rs 1:13 101. 0 12s !.I17.5!!42.S, 2n 83 154 156 230 G dun.

I du,

u i f 113. I 1Ai 102. I 144. C 2

10 10 17 In 2n R od II.u r..

I bl. 6 111 4 '

M.5 St. o 12% 7 134. 2 9

4S.

-55 02 131' Orrow.

hrm.u n...

11. 3 ' ! ! 3 S ' 13.t I 10.0 121 S ! 1 ; k 4 5

20,

31 l 37 32 39 I

Mb

77. 9 M5 121 3 12 ~. S j 121. 3 2t 8'

Si 15 lu 19

.i.atiL Ita O 12x 1 1& 9 127. 5 127.G ' 1;d 3 24 ' 143. 109 253 231 3 41 hco.

101. 2 1 ;3. 7 123. G IM 3 12a 5 126.7 12 79 07 115 127 170 I

l I

Ow.4 n :

3 3

i Cw..

.. 13 S 133. 6 11 R S ' 13'i. S ' 14 7. 5 l21. 0 l 32 102

%0 250 325 3G4 i

Curry.

..t 143.3, SL 0, 67. 2 13, 0

19. 2 {-

i 01 J t

67. I 14 24,

40 43 r2 mas.

.i 121. 8

57. F.

I 10. p 117. s ! 121 8 31 117 209 l 270 334 431 1.n ne.

. 111 9 121 2 l 111.G, W l.' 120.2 IJ1.0l-12L 4 79 328 4S$

6n5 77d 1,123 1ht oln.

. Jun 7 lia 5 ! !.'. n 103. 7 ' 111 0 12 GG 108 124 155 228 Tdbmouk...., 143. 0 l 143. 2,12J 8 ; 111. 0 120.5'131.Sl 14 67 03 0) 113 101 4

l'o rt l.ind i i 10S. $ l 12L 3 j

j Obebmn....., 127.4 121 4 : 123. A i la S 07 274 8 4C5 557 642 f,65 Slu!r noumb....j 147.1 [ 14 4.1 l l-19. 7 li.R 2,143.1,147.S 493 2, $02 '3,440 4,04 7 1, 3G7 5, 000 Lahington.. ; 12S.1,1213 ! 1016 121. 5 123. 4 ! 117. 4 3 4G 210 254 390 450 657

)

l Inled:

127. 4 ' 128 5 !' 12a. G 125 4 ' 107. 5 ' 21 01 110 113' 126 138 4

lluer.

131.3 lient on.......

121 2 121. 9 i 107. 0 l 91 2 101. 6 115. G ' 20 02 1IS l 120 ISO 225 Crook....

I15. 0 101 6 ! l-14.O ; 117.I n3 149. I 109. 6 g 4

IS 3S I 2s 50 57 1)et, chutes.... 10R 9 i1210l8 121. O i11. 5 i 122, 6 13 72 110 113 12S 195 Grant.

llarney.........

107. 5 121 4 '

bl.7 134.2 111 7 121 S 0

30 30 s3 43 01 73 8 l 121. O j 1016 124. O ! 12$. I l 4R 3 2

14 31 20 37 49 h ekaan......

101.S ~

127. 8 ' 120. 3 119. S, 131 0 t 120. 4 3G 211 313 379 501 G30

.It $erson....

59.I 12L 1 44, 2 105.3 05.0 1

0 6

10 21 36 113 4 ;j 115 8

.loscphine.......

15G. 7 10L 4 101.3 127.D 13S.7 25 Sn 12S ' 187 102 320 lilama t h...... a OS. 3 118.S 126. 3 113. O 116. 9 [ 131 4 21 125 IS5 ISI 219 330 LA c..

4t13 b7.1

91. 3 111 7 131.1l141.3 2

20 25 33 42 59

1. inn........ J 127. I 131 0 117.5 123.4 121 1 j 110. 7 Sti 173 23G 290 330 '

431 Alalheur....... t DI. 4 Si 6 101 7 115.7 10L 2 131.S 10 47

&4 109 132 187 Sl arion........ I13.8 131.$

121 4 11G. 6 110. 3 12u D 70 432 593 65G

, 780 1, 131 l'olk.......... 101.6 i 121 1 122.0 Ill.S 110.S 113.3 17 95 134 ISS 152 205 l'nina..........

1116 l 11L 5 127. 9 131 5 130.6 115. G 17 78 120 140 148 157

% 11w a..

07. 3 1312 104.3 11S.7 1li 2 131 1 6

37 37 43 44 65 Wheeler........

89. 7 100.I 12G.7 147,5 150.S 121 0 2

10 16 10 10 IS' Yntn hi:1....... I 110. 3 IIR 0, 141.I 131 S 143.5 124. S 20 143 237 247 2SS 322 I

Sorncrs: Oregon deaths due to r.!! forna of cancer for the ye.us 1041-44 by county were obtained frcta the Sute iteghtrar, Oregon State 1 oard of IIcalt h, Portland. The runninder of the data wtre obtainwl from respectivo s chanes cf Vit:d Statistics (.f the Uniad States.

$16 Public Heahh Rel.oris 4

. - - ~ _

..-a-u

+. % p e44 w e

. ', ; i.3%

p

)

1, no.. u. l. nn.1 sho kler, w.. Couq ailmn..f (f> > l'an.t..sr. M.. a nil l>ohnnn. A. II. : Cmnliitrability s'

. uw of si. alb na li:nnsnia ley the lt rt.8 n oil ratio, l.awd nu innrtality str.ttstics for the fifth I;

lo armlana of the lhter nhtlorni llet t d,.aih-nnd ath ret talt.pa. L*nited Rtalea. 3 f8"A 17

n the l' nim! 8talea, 1940 Yual htallailva~

Yltal 8tatl.rles-8pecit.1 Itclotts !.1, Tcbritary

t clai lte;.wt.19. June 1944, o 14.

3 r,0 4, 3

- ~,

T.Mc 5, Morlatily rcles per J00,000 populallon and nurnbers of dealbs for all forrns of uncer by munty, in tur!ous tlrne perlods, Msbington l

l l

lintes Nurnbers i

Cou nt y g.-

j i

i 1104-i 19:s.

1945-194s.

It:P 1 i 107.w 1031-lyls i 194 5-. lD4s ; 1911 1074-i 37 4J 47 32 57 01 37 42 47 52

  • 7 0:1 f

1 I

I l

J, 07 l 17.3 l

i 1h.

t.

20A

.;2s 1h 79 J 110.0 ni,

.o

,1 11. 4 I J6.

ji 67 C. s

,t 13 ~. U 119.

19$ J

' ' 7. 7 ' l '." s., ' 14 0, li 1J1 175 197 274, 32G 4sd e

j r. i M.

104 4 101.

12 9 1 ;2, ! ! ; 1. o 125 5 21 30.

51 71 9G 129 10,

t, to. o 10, ni '

IJ. o ! ". L 1 i I J' <,

N Sd {

54 ' 75 vi 110 11 L 2 101 s

' i. J !.C. : ;iu 7 u,. i la 21 20 ' 27 Os '

34 N.....

W o ;.. m, 9.

l'.s 0; 5 t.o 4 91.1 lir.. o IJ 21 19 14 20 44 W.

.W.

150 2 144 5 1.1..; in o 12x J IJo 4 100 2Ja 240 23d M1 370 l

l in-ii.....

1:ci. 6 121. 1 W

.1

. 7 1c. S 1.;. o m

112 i 11s ' 14 1 152 >

N 'i

' 5u 7 1., s. I 15). 9 2." )

Um. 375 44.

621 444 l t aa. lla

.a c

'...o 1.:.

'a c;l. t 11"

  • 4 o,'.

147 J

!J. 1

,7 4s j 4's 91

  • .a 124

, i'

.n I Jn o

.. a. 4 41 47 60,

As od

  • 70 l

J.

13#

  • 112., l lo.

117 ; lim 7 1 :,, %

IJJ.

K6.

10...

ul Si 117 l 110 1;d l IM f

155 4s2l, 531 Sui l 714 20 25 1 29 3 *,

1.'n. 2 i ll. 0 17 21

.. Juan l i s.

101 6 95 J 1 1.;

L.. mu n.

I l s.

l'59 131.7 1 ;, 5 119.4 IJ A. G N1 422 i

i 201 345 ' 431 ' 541 5u0 657 1%nham Clok.

1. ' 9 139 4 lui 1 131. 9 121 1 137 l

I i

f lid o.d '.

l T o.. n.

lux, i l I, 4 111 -

s?. 7 n 5.,

'6 2;

31 35 ; 24 [ 47 49 3

Ln il o 1 1 19..'

12a u 144 1 l'4.'

'. 21. 9 3J M!

73 i 51 91 129 Ch...n-IJ i, l'A 4 'lo: 1 121 4 121. 2

13. 4 125 INN ' 179 ! 240 ;s Ou7 l 370 Cuiu.cl a it.o. 2 MA lui 9 th 6 119.6 i 101.2,

?$ I

.R g 49 i M 41 I

i h.

1.r 7 7. a 117.0 mA 9L0

92. 6 104. 5 21 ' 45 1 39 45

.d M

linv...

SJ. 4 114.0 ! 121.7 ' 119. 5 ' 13'. 5 l h 4. n 12 25 !

2b 25 27 25 i

t h.n'n ct.

72. 0 ' t hi. 5 l 1:; a i la t..

124. 9 ' 1 M 7 '

9 18 e 25 i 25 21 35 lin 4 111.1 2;

$2 l 40 ;

79. 122 i

L : r.. n t.

No. 6 Ilo 9 Giu l u.1 ! 1.: c.,, t u, la s ; 17 t 6 l 101014s. 7 '2 We 3,967.4. c77 5, Aou.G. 7h4 ll s, s:i]

l l a ~.. p.

511l 54s.

714 i

.G 1:.61 1419 13!. s, 146. 0,1.1 J i 129. 4 ! 20s 317 ; 391 i la 1 G l 125. 4 117.0 127. 7 121.9 ; 117.2 137., !

9!'

107 130 141 130 j 195

+

S.. :.t a <.

15t 0 4

l 119. 9 i 144. 4 l 140, 3 ! 210 305 295 UN ' 39s 4sb

(

u..

144. 9,

I

.. a. h..

133. 0 - 129.7 1 135. b I lho.1 ) 110. 2 { 12a 5 !

56 73 hu. 62 75 102 hl 31 72 I 132 151

.\\ '. a on..

150. 7 l 15 4. s 121 4 97 i 15G 5 i la t 3 4

{

i 131.3 i 51 l

!!7.0f111.4 d2 105 127 140 1 151 220 a b..a a mm..

121. s i 10 L 9 117.7 !

i'c.d t u olle.

130, 2 l. 2 7..,

107.7 101.9 1 167. 0 l 112. 4 l 32 45 40 41 j GN 57 140.4 14 2. ',

Eu 1,397 't,551 1,700 '2, 090 2, M7 140.1 l 14J. 0 l.134 h,130. 9 >

i':.nc j

g I

l i h. 3, 14 0. !

12u. 4 i 110. G i 112. 9 11l. 3 171 294 l 30')

293 ' 3M 415 o k.um.

rnohono h.

142.5 I N. 0, 127. G l a 4 0 l 13 s. 2. 140. O ! 455. 610 l 703 850 !!, Oas 1,457 151. G,137. 3 ' 125. 3 I lui. 31 13% 2, 132. 6 ! 0i5 1,271 'l,365 1,655 ;1, 060 2, 50d Spnaw.,

143 4 *! 12s1<l13t11.,. 7 l 13a 5.120. 9120. 5 r 101' 1278 96 144 130 ISS Neva nt.

Thuinoa.

114.$

12a 2 i) i 133. 5 i 137. 3 i laa 5 4

141

  • 231 Oc als 372 531 M h!naaa..

170. 2 1 1317 l 122. 0 i lix. 3 I 4 31. 0 123. G i 101,i 177 167 i 171 105 227 L Litna...

IJG. 5 j 131. 2 l 120 5 } 121. A 130.0 l 131. s ' 3p) 'l 5GO 028 j 771 944 1,235 i

i l

l 1

i sote,. Wadlwton death due to cli fena cf cancer fur the ye.as 193 8,193tr-34, unti 1911-41 by cant.ty were obhaned fro:n the State }lcginrar, hhin@a Stato 110ani ot !!calt h, 0:ymp.a The reumhaler cf the data were obu.ined from respntive robaaes cf Vit.d bintbik. of the United 6tatca.

Ll. 81, b. 1, Apr:1 1%5 317

- -. - ~

.-e.

pg.g,sfp9 e*,,

RADIOWGICAL EFF6 CTS OF OPERATING tie ICEICELW NUCLEAR GENERATING PLA!E l

l Tne application by Northern States Power Conpany for a pemit to construct the Fonticello plant was reviewed from the standpoint of radiological safety by four bodies in the Atomic Energy Conmission's process of licensing and regulation, as outlined in the attached booklet,

" Licensing of Power Reactors." These review groups included the AEC regulatory staff, the Comission's statutory Advisory Comittee on Reactor Safeguards (ACliS), and an atomic safety and licensing board which conducted a public hearing in the matter on May 25-26, 1967, at Buffalo, Minnesota. The initial decision of the board, granting a provisional construction permit, was then reviewed by the Conmission itself. The construction pemit was issued on June 19,1967. Each of these review bodies concluded that the proposed plant could be constructed and operated without undue risk to the health and safety of the public.

On November 8, 1968, the applicant applied for an operating license.

Further safety reviews are now being conducted by the AEC regulatory staff.

Tne ACRS will also review this application and advise the Comission thereon.

Further, if an operating license is granted, the plant will be under AEC surveillance and undergo periodic safety inspections throughout its lifetime.

Small anounts of radioactive mterial are permitted by AEC regula-tions to be released into the environnent at controlled rates and in controlled amounts from a nuclear power plant. This requires a continuous program of ronitoring and control to assure that release limits are not exceeded. The release limits in AEC regulations are based on guides aeveloped by the Federal Radiation Council, a statutory body, and approved by the President for the guidance of Federal agencies. These release limits are such that continuous use of air or water at the point of release TIrm the site would not result in exposures exceeding national and international standards for radiation protection of the public.

Tne concentrations of liquid radioactive effluents released from the plant are further reduced by dilution in the body of water to which they arc discharged. A survey of all operating nuclear power plants has shown that the concentrations of radioactivity in liquid releases during 1967 were only a smll fraction of the Irlease limits applicable to the radionuclides in the effluent.

(

c L

~

1-4

f Q..',

tCNTICELLOs A nuclear cnergy gamblo l.

The stakes nutation, cancer, death citizens are concerned about tho idea of radioactive wasto,o being dumped into the Mississippi at Monti. cello. We should be.

It's our drinking

~

water. And in spite of the assurances of safety from the Atomic Energy

+

(1)

Commission,and Northern States Power Company -- the safety and performance records of nuclear energy plants have been dismal.

of the original 12 nuclear power plants that have boon put into opera' tion, 0 have failed -- including the ono at Elk River where radioactivo leaks i

forced shutdown -- and the Northern Statec Power "Pathfindor" plant in (2)

Sioux Palls which execeded its yearly concentration limit despite being operated below full power. Threo plants have been abandoned (one at an -

estimated $7 million decontamination cost, paid by the taxpayor, of course).1 In all cases where these planto failed, citizens had been assured, as now, of compacto safety.

Q.

If there were a real danger to health f rom radioactive waste, would p

the Atomic Energy Commission approve of such a plant?

A.

It appears that the AEC not only would but in fact has approved of such plants. The llanford, Washington Atomic Energy facility on the Columbia River is an examplo.

A 1965 study showed that Oregon countien bordering tho Columbia River p

downntroam from the llanford facility had a 53 percent' higher cancor rate than the rest of the state. The JOURNAL OF EtNIRONMENTAL HEALTil reported: "This physiographic pattern of saalignancy providos strong circumstantial evidence that not just Icukemia but all types of cancer are influenced by bodily ingested radioisotopos in quantities heretofore thought safo."2 We might add, ' declared safe' by the AEC.

Q.

But why would the AEC approvn a nuclear power installation whero even

'the slightest question of nafety exists?

A.

It is important to keep in mind that the AEC was established to promote the use of nuclear energy. Limiting such use, even for safety reasons, is c1carly a conflict of interest for the AEC.

g Q.

What is a ' safe level' of radioactivity in the environment?

(6)

A.

There is no 'cafo Icvol' of radioactivity.

Radiation as minimal as

.X-ray exposure of an unborn child i's associated with icukemia in-later-I N) life.2 Standards depend on how many deaths and mutations we are willing' j

to accept.

For example, the Federal Radiation Council has set its standards at

.5 ren yearly exposure.

"If wo assume the population of the Twin Cities I

metropolitan area to be two million, then a continuing yearly exposure-of.5 rem -- the PRC standard doso -- would be expected to cause from 10 to 100 cases of leukemia per year and about an equal number of other t

3,

(

j (2) typos of neoplasms (cane.r)... Whether a loss of this magnitude is tobegainedfromaparticularuseofatomiconorgy."{doringthebenefits acceptable to society can only be determined by: cons t

\\

A question one might ask is 'whose bonofits and whose depths?'

s Q.

How rnuch radioactive waste would the proposed Monticello Plant discharao into the Mimpimsippi?_

s A.

Northern states Power estimates a total wasto,-including fuel leaks, of 91.4 Curios yearly.4 (9)

General Electric, who has a reputation for seriously underestimating j

radioactive dischargo, guesses 30,000 Curios the first year. Note the discrepancy: 29,990.6 Curies. The real figure is anybody's guess.

("A Curie is equivalent to the activity of one gram of radium. We can j

all recall the excitement and intensivo cearchos instituted when capsulos (10) containing a few milligratns of radium were lost or misplaced.

Yet the quantity of radioactivity proposed for release from a single nuclear j

power plant each year, even under the most optimistic assumptions,as i

to its operation, is several times the activity of the entire world supply of radium.")4 Q.

Whnt about the present argument between Northern states Power and the, 311ution Control Agency as to allowable limits of radioactivo contami-nation?

A.

This is a sham battle diverting attention from the real point that go,o amount of radioactive waste is safe and unc.ar no conditions should dumping it in our drinking water be tolerated.

Eugene P. Dolum, in his widely used textbook, FUNDAMENTALS OF ECOLOGY, (11) says: "Should a system receive a higher. level of radiation than that under which it evolved, nature will not take -it ' lying down,' so to speak; adaptations and adjustments will occur along with climination of sensitivo strains or species."

Put another ways radioactive waste durnped into the Minsissippi Will result in mutations or freaks in plants, animalo, fish and people.

Cancer and the death rato due to cancer will increase.

No limits have been set on tho increase of 111noss and death that is "acceptablo."

That will apparently depend on how loud people protest as they learn what is happending.

Q.

In is necessary to discharge radioactive waste into tho Mississippi Rivor?

A.

NO.

"The quantity of radioactive wastes which is discharged depends on the extent of the waste treatment nystem.

Radioisotopes in the wastes i

(12) can vary from none to several million Curies por year. Chere need be no i

radioactivo dischargo since those that cro released are the re'sult of deliberate decisions.- The only gain offsetting these rolesses is a slightly lower, and as yet unspecified electrical cost to the consumor."4

,i,

\\

' (.

(

e-

.. 4 /

g3)

Q.

What can you do?

]

A.

Hako your voice heard. Don't leave it to the other guy. Protest now

!)

against dumping radioactive waste in g amount into the Mississippi j..

River or any other body of water in Hinnesota.

Send your protest tos

.. Governor Harold LoVander, Stato Capitol D1dg., St. Paul, Hint)coota 1

. Hayor Arthur Haf talin, Minneapolis Court flouse, Hinnoapolis, Minnosota

. Your Own Stato Legislator, Stato Capitol D1dg., St. Paul, Minnosota f

. Mr. John Dadalich, Chairman - Pollution control Agoney, Dopartoont of Hoalth Duilding, University of Minnosota, Minnoapolis, Minnesota e

A' ATTEND POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY MEETING (Permit for HSP will bo granted or doniod at this incoting)

Tuesday, March 11 Voterans Servico Duilding 9:00 AM Capitol Approach - St. Paul Sourco Hatcrial (1)

United States Atomic Energy Commission, " Operating History of U. S. Nuclear Ret.ctors" j

(2)

Robert Cunningharr. radaley, " Oregon Malignancy.%ttorn Physiograph-ically Italated to Hanford Washington Radioisotopo Storage:"

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL llEALTit, May-Juno, '65 (3)

R. E. Pogue and D. E. Abrahamson, " Benefits, Risks, and Regulations,"

JOURNAL OF MINNESOTA ACADEMY OF SCIENCE, Vol. 35, No.1,1960.

(4)

Abrahamson and Pogue, "Dischargo of Radioactivo and Thermal i

Wastes," JOURNAL OF HINNESOTA ACADEMY OF SCIENCE, Vol. 35, No.1, 1968.

s 1

)

li

~

Prepared and Distributed by Russell llatling, 2nd Ward

~ '

e

~f

,

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20127N679&oldid=4263612"