ML20129E268

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Recommends Commission Conclude 6-yr Debate & Reach Decision Favoring Restart
ML20129E268
Person / Time
Site: Crane Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 05/21/1985
From: Bailey D
PENNSYLVANIA, COMMONWEALTH OF
To: Palladino N
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML20117P504 List:
References
CON-#285-107, REF-10CFR9.7 SP, NUDOCS 8506060414
Download: ML20129E268 (2)
v • d • e


Text

,

.g

., e;.

'e,-. [.

t,-,..,

~

a-n

~

o : ~ s a n.c v

...v c.. <. -< "

- r am c.m ur Pi i.q.m Orrice of the /waitor Ge:a ral IIur:-i bmT! Inno

%y

'l, l '. S E Mr..Nunzio Palladino

-Chairma U. S." Nuclear Regulatory Conmissic.

Washington, D.

C.

20555

Dear-Mr. Chairman:

.ILrecently received a communieat:nn fre.m Mr. Jack Parry,

'Internat1inal Vice President, I n t e r r. a t ! ' n a l Isra t he rhood o f Electrica Wor ke r s_, - who is aware of my :xperience in the United States Congress as a nember of the M'i.itar y Proc urement and Nuclear Sys tems -Subcommit tee of the Ar ad.ervices Committee and my work'on the Trade Subcorraittee

' t r.t thys and Means

-Conmittee, concerning the re-tart of TMi unit 1 While I reali:e that tnis has bee n

.1 controversial issue, I-f ully under s t and the r the ' ir.m :di.- t e concerns cf the commission have to be the protectior, of pub!:e health and safety.

I also understand-that national poli <v.

in it: its broad rarifications, particularly where. fission r e:.c

rd.. r e corn e rned, is impatted by a" decision to restart ~ Unit 1.
Powever, a.. a iv mbe r.cf t he "I

"d Er r v i c" C o r..m i t t c e, I had access to virtually all information availaate to anyune i.i our countty concernine all asper s of nuclear power i r.c l ud i n.

our weapons progran..

As a membet of t ;.e.. :. y s ad Means Trade Fubcommittee, the aspects of nucle - t N h n 1 m: y t r a n s. f e r :tmad,

and' problems asanciated with f i nanc.ag the der tlopuer.t of m er in this country, were cons t a nt l y 1: i.' a t

.y docrc:ct.

In addition. 1 represente'l a ungressional district in c nter of a r,reat dea!

J

' Western Pennsylvania which as tru research for the nuclear indurtr ar.d aise wa<

. nuclear supply industry center.

I a l s o < t. r v'. d ei

M! Cor.7 r
s s i or.a l Ta: L Force which. attempted to

>cive the ie ding i ta; s t t r-to cleanup-Unit- !!.

Gi~ven the i n f o rma t t or, a v a i l ab'.e t-t r.e Camaitsion, including the great degree

.C public awareness, the gtest amount cfl time that tr.e.public he i v,sted ir. t:o-spreal process, !

very=strongly reer.r.end (Lat ' be N:7 f ! 10!. cenclude the-sti c-vear debate and reach a det.i. non.

8506060414 850522 l

PDR-10CFR PDR s".

PT9.7

.p. S.r.y q

s

- 2 I deeply share, and de'. net ' e.a-in sny way it d en i ;; r a t e the vital'and sincere concerns 1 f :ha public, uno have so

~

consistent 1y'en'phasi:ed the ne< d tc, assure that public health

-and. safe,ty will be prctected when TMI-l restart'.

However, !

sinc ~erely'believe that consumers, G'U :;u c l t. a r, ur. ion groups, employees, and government officials, witheat exception, understand the ultimate prinac:- of that.ssue (i.e.,

p rc t ec t i c ri of public health and safety).

Within the realir. of every practical limitation, that protection has been given due' and proper consideration by the ccomission, the public, and others.

It is time to be g i n t h e s a l.- a t pover t o e sin u~i, r s in the service area of TMI-l to help with another aspect of public health and safety; that being the elimination of the-unfair-financial-burden to the residential and industrial customers to purchase more expensive replacement pe. ee r.

Fifty eight million dollars would be the immediate saving, ant.ualized at present' dollar values, to ccnsumers i n P e n t. s v i v a r.l a from the restart of TMI-1.

We need to-constantiv nonitat tne sci- ' operation of nuclear power'and I fully support every effort. to ensure public participation in : hat proce s.

Howev", i feel that there is a fundamental elea.ent at procedural fairr.ess to tarpayers, ennsumers, and oli those i n. v o i, " d i r, ha process.

That fairness is to rec c? '. i : e that we have e,haus t-to.he greatest extent possible', e ve ry censi.iera t i on su r rc und;1g protection of healta and safety.-

it is time r. xe to nove t, rwa:1; it

. *in riow

-i n t"p ra t e the lessons learned i r on, the TM!-?-failure into our technolory,

ind :t is time now to look at-the 'i t v"ar public r e r. o r d a r.d make a decision.

Str.terely, f

- s

[

.'.6 y' s

~

e ba w

. E. ?-

-i-> ->

.g o !%-

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION M El COPetISSIONERS:

2:>t&.C Nunzio J. Palladino, Chairman Thomas M.~ Roberts

'g g,gY 16 P3:02 James K. Asselstine Frederick M. Bernthal t

I:

Lando W. Zech, Jr.

'M gj In the Matter of METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY Docket No. 50-289 (Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit No.1)

SERVED MY 15 YES MEMORANDUM AND ORDER CLI-85-08 I.

Background and Sumary On June 21,1984, Marjorie and Nonnan Aamodt filed a motion with the Comission alleging that releases of airborne radioactive materials from the March 28,1979 accident at TMI-2 were substantially greater than have been acknowledged and that these releases have lead to an unexpectedly high level of cancer in local residents.

The Aamodts based their allegations on door-to-door inter 'iews that Marjorie Aamodt and others conducted of residents of two areas near tne TMI-2 facility. The Aamodts requested the Consission to investigate their allegations and to defer a decision.on the restart of TMI-l until the issues they raised had been studied further and

. fully resolved. On December 13, 1984 the Comission denied the Aamodts' motion to sponsor a new study of health-related issues arising from the TMI-2

[MC3oY/.l-(b

/

i

O O

2 accident. The Commission stated that the "Aamodts had not presented sufficient reliable infonnation to show that previous, more comprehensive and scientific surveys of TMI-2 accident radiation releases are erroneous."

CLI-84-22, 20 NRC 1573.1 On January 15, 1985 the Aamodts filed a motion asking the Connission to reconsider the December 13 denial of their request. They also requested the Commission to reopen the record in the TMI-1 restart proceeding, asserting that the issues raised by their survey were relevant to "the management competence, emergency planning and health issues" litigated in the restart proceeding. On April 13, 1985, the Aamodts amended their request by

. submitting additional information.

For the reasons which follow, the motions to reopen the record and to defer a decision on TMI-1 restart are denied.2 II. Analysis of Motion to Reopen the Record The'Aamodts claim that the record of the restart proceeding should be reopened to examine health-related issues ari' sing from the TMI-2 accident.

The Aamodts allege that death certificates obtained from the Pennsylvania 1

Commissioners Asselstine and Bernthal dissented.

They would have provided NRC funding to ongoing studies being conducted by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's Department of Health.

2Should the Conniss' ion in tne future acquire inSrmation regarding the need for any furtner studies along the lines requested by the Aamodts,_it will, of course, make its views known along with any appropriate reconnendations. The NRC staff is currently evaluating this matter and will be providing reconnendations to the Commission shortly. The Commission is also assessing whether the Connission's Advisory Panel for the Decontamination of TMI-2 could provide a useful forum for citizens to raise health-related concerns.

These matters are not relevant to the restart

, proceeding because health effects resulting from the TMI-2 accident are not related to a determination whether TMI-1 can be safely operated today. See II.C, infra.

3 Department of Health establish that: (1) there is an elevated cancer mortality rate in certain areas surrounding TMI-2; (2) an increased rate of neonatal hypothyroidism in Lancaster County in 1979 resulted from the TMI-2 accident; (3) serious post-accident health effects within and beyond the ten-mile radius of TMI demonstrates the presently-approved emergency plans are inadequate; (4) residents near TMI are suffering adverse health effects from high levels of radiation currently in the environment; and (5) the 5100 degree Fahrenheit temperatures reached within the TMI-2 core during the accident produced elevated levels of fission products and transuranics which have escaped to the environment and could be harmful to the public.

The Aamodts also believe the record shoul.d be reopened on an issue relating to the integrity of licensee's management. The Aamodts allege that information developed in the restart proceeding on the Dieckamp mailgram issue demonstrates that licensee personnel lied to the Pennsylvania Bureau of Radiation Protection on the morning of March 28, 1979. The Aamodts maintain that after the Comonwealth had been warned of projected radiation releases of ten (10) rems per hour over Goldsboro, TMI personnel discounted this information by claiming, contrary to fact, that the surveillance teams had been dispatched and had verified that a significant release had not occurred.

Under established Commission practice three factors are considered in determining whether a motion to reopen should be granted: "(1) Is the motion timely; (2) does it address significant safety (or environmental) issues; and (3) might a different result have been reached had the newly preferred material been considered initially."

In the Matter of Metropolitan Edison (Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit No.1), CLI-85-2, 21 NRC 282, 285, n.3 (1985).

h

_,_ii

4 The NRC staff opposed the request to reopen the record, arguing that the criteria for reopening the record had not been satisfied. The licensee also opposed reopening.of the record on whether licensee personnel lied to Bureau of Radiation Protection, but did not take a position on whether the record should be reopened on the other issues raised by the Aamodts.

A.

Timeliness The central issue raised by the Aamodts relates to their allegation that there are elevated levels of cancer in the TMI area. Their request to reopen the record on that matter is untimely.

The Aamodts first presented their concerns regarding cancer levels to the Comission in June of 1984, yet did not request reopening of the record until January of 1985. The Aamodts have not presented a'ny justification for not requesting at that time a reopening of the record.3 B.

Whether Claims Raise a Significant Safety or Environmental Issue The Comission has reviewed the material presented by the Aamodts regarding alleged elevated cancer levels in the TMI area and continues to believe that the prior studies are correct in concluding that the number of

~ _.

health effects from radiation releases arisincj from the TMI-2 accident will be negligible ~. The Aamodts have not presented information which casts doubt

~

~

on the previous studies.

For. example, the Aamodts have not reported when the cancers which form the basis for their allegations were diagnosed relative to 3The Aamodts also have not established when the information they rely on in support of their other claims became available anc whether the facts could have been presented to the Comission at an earlier date.

5 the TMI-2 accident and have not shown that the cancers resulted from the TMI-2 accident. When the cancers arose or were first diagnosed is particularly significant, in light of the obvious fact that cancers which arose prior to the TMI-2 accident cannot be attributed to the accident, and the fact that, even for those cancers. arising since the accident, the undisputed scientific evidence is that there is generally a latency period for cancer development following exposure to radiation.

Even if additional information, such as date of diagnosis of the cancers, type of cancer, health, occupational, and personal histories of the deceased were available, we believe it is unlikely that statistically and scientifically valid conclusions could be reached regarding the causes of the cancers in the small populationgroupsassociatedwIththeAamodts'informalsurvey.

The epidemiological evidence presented by the Aamodts is fragmentary and anecdotal. As a technical and logical matter, it is not sufficient to support a reasonable doubt as to the adequacy and correctness of the several detailed scientifically conducted studies on which the Commission relied.

Therefore, under the circumstances, the Aamodts have not raised a significant safety or environmental concern.

Their other claims similarly fail to raise significant issues.

With respect to their allegations that there was a higher rate of neonatal hypothyroidism in Lancaster County in 1979 than there was in the 1981-1983.

period, the Pennsylvania Department of Health has analyzed the seven cases of hypothyroidism that arose in 1979 and concluded that they could not be attributed to radiation, but should be attributed instead to factors such as incomplete maturation of thyroid glands and lack of enzymes to synthesize thyroxine.

In fact one of the seven cases occurred prior to the accident and -

another within three months following the accident, a time period too short 1

=

s 6

for the hypothyroidism to have resulted from the TMI-2 accident. The Aamodts have not provided information that would lead us to question the Department of Health's conclusions.

The Aamodts' allegation that health effects reported by TMI area residents, such as nausea and severe vomiting, resulted from radiation released from the TMI-2 accident that was higher than reported is not supported by available information. The NRC staff estimates that the average radiation dose to an individual within ten miles of the TMI site resulting from the TMI-2 accident was approximately 8 millirems, and the average dose received by individuals within 50 miles was approximately 2 millirems.

Based on accepted scientific principles governing the effects of exposure to i

varying levels of radiation, these dose levels are far too low to be the cause of the kind of adverse health effects cited by the Aamodts.

In the absence of other evidence demonstrating a link between the cited health effects and the TMI.-2 accident, the Comission must continue to support the findings reached in earlier assessments of radiation releases from the TMI-2 accident.

With respect to the Aamodts' claim that there are currently unacceptably high levels of radiation in the environment near TMI, the NRC staff, the

~

Environmental Protection Agency and the Pennsylvania Department of i

Environmental Resources conducted an informal field survey with sophisticated l

radiation monitoring equipment of sites selected by the Aamodts.

The agencies concluded that the radiation levels were within the normal range.

The Aamodts also speculate that the high temperatures (in excess of 5000 degrees Fahrenheit) reached within the TMI-2 reactor core during the accident created a "high probability" that transuranic materials were released into the atmosphere. Transuranic materials emit alpha radiation and could be

7

~

another possible source of adverse health effects.

The NRC staff has examined these allegations and concluded that the likelihood of measurable

. quantities of transuranic material becoming airborne and subsequent.ly being released into the environment is low. The staff further noted that no measurable quantity of transuranic material other than that associated with normal background levels has been identified in any of the air or soil samples taken around the TMI site during or after the accident. Accordingly, 3

again the'Aamodts concerns do not raise a significant issue.

Finally, the Aamodts' claim that the licensee deceived the Pennsylvania Bureau of Radiation Protection concerning radiation measurements on the day of the TMI-2 accident is based on a draft document which was prepared in the course of an NRC investigation conducted in 1980, but.before pertinent t

individuals had been interviewed by the NRC. After the interviews, the staff detemined 'that the facts contained in the working draft were erroneous and concluded that the licensee had not provided erroneous information relating to the Goldsboro dose-rate prediction. The Comission has concluded on the basis of its review of the allegations and the staff's and licensee's responses that the Aamodts' claim of deception is not supported'and accordingly does not raise a significant safety issue.

C.

Likelihood of Reaching a Different Result The Comission does not believe.'that the infomation presented by the Aamodts in their motion would have led to a different result. With the possible exception of the claim that Metropolitan Edison Company officials deceived Commonwealth officials on TMI-2 accident radiation releases and the i

i i

.,_.,.,,,--.m.--

-,---.m....

___.___,..,__._._...-.-m_,

8 neonatal hypothyroidism issue,4 the Aamodts' concerns are.not relevant to the restart proceeding because health effects resulting from the TMI-2 accident are not related to a detennination whether TMI-1 can be safely operated today. As discussed above, the Commission finds that the Aamodts' claims of licensee deception to be without any foundation.

With respect to the neonatal hypothyroidism, the information presented by the Aamodts does not form a basis for concluding that the Licensing Board erred in LBP-81-59, 14 NRC 1211, 1596 when it concluded that the alleged incrcased in neonatal hypothyroidism was not caused by the TMI-2 accident.

For these reasons the Aamodts' motion to reopen the record is denied, as well as its request that the Comission sponsor a health effects study prior to making a restart decision.

Commissioner Asselstine's separate views are attached.

It is so ORDERED.

D Fo the Comi sion ls f'

yy g ( 'J/.g, g*"-[c :..

4 A.-

Ip

/

g V A.-~-

,., g SAMUEL J. CHJti

_ 'g Secretary off the Comission o ig[: "

j k;N+**efI Dated at Washington, D.C.

this /le@ day of JNm 1985.

/

4The Licensing Board addressed the hypothyroidism issue in the context of evaluating the protective action criteria used by the Comonwealth of Pennsylvania in emergency planning.

SCcmnissioner Peberts was not present for the affimation of this its, if he had been present, he would have approved.

E v..

.. :M i.~;}-

g: !;:Y t-

'~

i sI.2N-[.. h. $'.~;)h[$. *.:-hf,I f'f Y)

S y.-

p.k;f II.$hb5 hNEN

~ djMh h

Vf wf$.2 % /f 82 hi 1 - r v: -

t

. s.;;

. :*/'i :..c

@, y-),.

!! jh.Wv a3

% A ncas' A e o c

[

h$ '/ eMa, cru/ /M,.rG4. Aa 6Tn&&,,

' AC h[/ f,f

~

.sj^tjts' f)'f/(f.-f fth l_

t. C

%g;,4,.3/(ficawa.,ru I+- m /.A M 1 N 5

--- g -

1 -

w

~.

AT

^ *?

s'1 Ob !-

&h

^

eun.

,pg. n

./>

Y

.. d31.1 n4 r

c I"

O!b

..h YlOY/

,&.0 8 LY A M

..b f

. w-;

k!

3ll7 sd0;va h Ag $ J8)$iun fse n

/ rl$z;n-Le.JaNcNc%$sa0prut-spare

$h.5{?

dda2%Was $4rd>4'a meLe

%y$

V s L A L A7% a Whab t b

/2;eewa/ /NWn-cb ada>pOdiI.2 aJ TW d'

wdo

%. 74Y':Lo TlDdLc aPAa.4aes40/

48 n. & a,e A x R k k sh d i A tr

?

i $ M $iM $ $ $7.. h -c

.jeeams :

v gg w p;, _ g, g,.u g;y,g,

t D. a. o - d e b ee.e k c li c' < 5 ct W ce

+

&hkh tes cA/k_77 Af.fAmcAh,.c

>w b_

ug fa_de W

. dae u_ m,

Acuec h.o die 4 ' del Q.cf c

Sgwud_kgLk2w-ze~ZCNAw'

~

. ~ *.

.'[~.".

't $

,1,*..., h,',1

~~ ~

7}~

vt*,

dj I i kkI bb bb)b hi.N

dSU

.1 55.'I m

~

wgs I'?._h??b b

.c As

'ae / _:%~&u/AC.c?A ev &wnadEKlau:bac6cze

${ ?

a f f f & hct.g.e s

^

uWkw nuc E

may&

wa j$

4 meharyr;ee M&

A;gr- #<4aey 44# aasJ 1_

ia9 ZbsA&# LB',aC ig!

M

, aB/w

=

$k webu M:A pa-A s s, w i 4 L &ti T O:7ae%.m -

Ab.snm$cckb,k.67A&c2M "O

hl{hbh5

%e%l A/w a,tigsawdeA~~

>w hedJ7es,e A4

]$a' Ae GseG'WAla.A

< W a d r t-

& 4% 6.% 4&

',.de6r

  • M A.4sr po r

~

A a-.&.1 una : Arma%~

g % paw

>$ur a23rhY EAc

~ ' " ' ^

h

? h u _ A. W '

Apr 2h a

n

s A

En x7%

&wrLat G<a A d ck

=.

<a 11 sn

.. was

""*~_ __

  1. i w int $. d 2$~ '...-y. 5

.,f?&y e....W

a b

a"*

m a

n:n XCbl'Y h>

$7&RWle='w'..W%&J..re_

_<~De>h._

d$ke,d

&s

%B?

w t*"

J e

2/ NS QM if

.m

,u

?

A_i pan

-~

,g

4

$ nfd zu { sss%

. nerna V ER ik s ddr&.4 dMfm e as w arate-s&

haesadef farL%d6al A

.k y

M b.. h e "g A a d y a k m aa m+

A _ d a # s e d __

. ;%Jf W@t,s j

yf

' E_

/ ura + 4r w ff,m (x, n

7 5:'

6e

& l k bAe2 fA > N a m a

_U@,

'h

_ jr tE444&

0l JLA&f

.r%

s&x ara saaJ4%,w&Lda 'am h_ad&A ys s.?

144~aA A A &oa

%d,;cah~,9st A n W

pud %wej ffsase&f 0

l 358_.

4).14 lea _. sui _x.scAad_ d

.., e. _

a Agn6

' ll nAsudski.dthasc<fu zeaa

- ---..- f p r @.

_.ad/Mrce. h.wa

' L& w%_

~~

  1. N

,a.$i.<Adf h'4f_.?)lkso+d7 mud

.f4tdfo.e 0,5)a1Ay)eANa.-.9% A &gkhbf

  • 4 e

,,,r,.'

- T ' 'j.'.6,.[ N -,5

.g.,,,,,,_,g.,,,;,,,,,. ;,

jg 6,.-

_gg Q..,g,z.,...,, ;,

%:. y.~j 0.,-

'..{- ?.

y.

b8E5/,.h$.9'.'?d$;l[dSi.hE '.1.1. #^}$JII-IhS5$i.,-[gd'.;,l;;fM /E'd'5(MjNih[yhMh)..Ih$.

u w a,

?!M,k hi t

%l$

- 4)&_A5caA G M t&GMkd..h

j. -

Ti$$h w Art.2efkz8 m A, & Aue e

mdskabeXLafx ar.

@t Mi Mn 'ae%tefxB.~d2tm L e/s

%"kihbefaC pi/d ' erAAnata-,

daat& as(sch: AL_ ' M a_ e n ty

?

ad@?[

d 6 lags *

  • b 451, byaftL wa,

- (cw. bra a

_ m..

.y.

Ke-/3raJp _a74ga Xe-133. _

lM m cf d h f}-a..Y.

/ v._ &.... p w. ' %-

iE

,,. h k!k.k h/5fNV Y d078.Mb7-i$

A G s~ A A. 4 4 x %

a as mxr.

-4 vf4Em wrwxra-

]Aerc a u & &ugb A & &> r ss

_2t.a if':

y_

9%.

6A ch&t.<dGe&2.ca...sesLy<4zf4.aL ' -

M

~

~

Midgwam.

- _a. d

.-.mr&n'$..rWAdalkapa- &-

4,;

i %..__.. w $ #a% m anee6 & a AK4

\\ "

  1. 4m.e. mMdaC2a_aul#L >u

?E Atc

. flowk%%eedREJL JCa VAaJa-re Awd<dM

";-._.. #:%fe;g+sa.e&Aef(4 ;A4lv

i.*

~

.-.m

          • --.-e.I-.

e' **

M12hu n-a?2?.% ?.,* - *

  • yg42*5&a&theMS&m'"c2s&&

.%,. :.*:::;.:?4' f:n-M_,-h *

    • +

.I

.,....t.

@c gp,u

? **

26 4-w=

w.w p g.g_

Q,

~, -

k 0

W A& A s a

_. ? %

Rf J4 ATC dM%en L e_a+wea~#

& & & L 4,tt /2 b n waed&

/

. J' weaa%L n adJA 8

me

- #w _.

das.

Av_ A_.

i%ii Ad4 fan c %.. J fJ w n saees x-us c

?>

f% art $ &

A & 4 /fd b v-A-m A

rc n

c.

W

_' I.. r -x aual

./e P & D 5M a

o A,~ 4 w e ege m

[h

[Y $ bM ffD)ska d d $ps-d o)Ge6 su&&

d wAae$ft.a,n* a -Aa y%*

A S A L re,cs nr n a. d 1 2; f s u a n s d m an d a S.

A A L.

s tyg % _w x 5 * !

x 8 M a m A dis 4

4 L.

d R 6 A y s s % ~ f g n@ k e d,, 4 %

.Q no

_\\

?-.

/Cwh+n m&nA6.6 C5.$Cr

'.-..,.F ?y' $ __

f fln [AM.af kyM,$ M M-(0 erd ' f [ A

/.

m*-

.f r % d er/gs p

u k u g & & 2 22p _;

c

~

. *'4 r

3;.rc. :.,..m**. :'R f...,i

..;,;. *,,. - Y,' " '. : :.- -

,,4 '. :. _

~

NAO.YE$$I5ME'i)3.tE; i ~

e' *. ::i.,.,.: ;,..n.._,3 " 5N55$;[f;dEO[5,..,t-jc;;.

r 4,,

~

. : Wlp.'.-;;.:. :.:2:,.:;.! ' :~-

f, '!bk k 5$fi$ $TdM n i :'.50~/$

'. N $.'s.T.' 5'[.

f w,gr.s

..ww z

e.

d. *'..M C

$'f2Q$

5?d0

'M1

.YY W

MM Ak..

. 4;?4'1T. -_

zn=

'.2 _ md4'

_ eda &

fik

'ra my &

4 s' U 1

p.: xc.

lS.

U ( &h~ x.

  • .e naf

=Lo4wd

$y!

eg a w W & &r_irr_o_&_Aa._de m,k{,$

a w a s u e-_

3-y'Jh? t. $hW A&_A

..D if ak JudwemfTAU-2 cw

-.%isce

' k esd&&h % A B ka 2

fhi 44ar,60 t 'edl%e run-a 0

20

% ar$ m A na&&.x4 N%s d d %,_.._av t,_ W_ c.L A [m e m-

-d q%N N

i.v,yb?6<4nd7r7cuiide x w w /G '

(J/s onpAnw L

, dh& &

x sthe m s

e;

~

e

,'94' a-

,s.%.,

?S?

//fTfQ

. f ~,

_,.6*LL f4_4*J_7Y. f d/

.-.s,..

.R

v'2&'hW~ WJiaB&5 4 lA Tt tW

?w[ c2Vfsco r..& w/m.A_-f&he

"~

somenommA %wX4

/

f,,

'2hA!.h ?

A o

N (bY$.

?.

b.N

./'$'t$$8.W Y

/

.o tu A jL j.za_q d 7.J'.40:.eTEkA'd.oxe.s d5/j?.ef)2f5,

" '~

iqz:bac.h.. n.g.

-A

/$ b_k [t&lL'cA k.e' :~h4 ???.rze-).dnt&5..D/.m O#0

.p~.-_G.!..,;yga._v,Lp %.... ~n ^

sef.6.f%.....w.

^~

.w.r.

y-..

'.m Ja _a m

?

q

-g q,7,.

E~"'"

.i r

1?-. 'g2O

,)6.g l.c al c A':' ',* g )

.f,',g'[,

f,,)/} } - L y

l 1::

/l.g;2/

, /1 s

1 h'

&* 'h 5

W /,,

t,f:':;..'i-w n.w d'.g.W n gg ey g y. V. a 5,< u k t n. &

ct n

r, 2Oli1 :et t% j,',Y$'%? l'. f D'9'

/

,.b

.e h.

l%vL4

ACeg[,h t>--

ao M

I i

lZ

~

  1. r&&s.edJ.wm. A?.a.n.ahn./2imV -

E R W-N'.V d',qAm h / & end % [ A wcl~,"--

ci!v7 ^ od&m4/AanO%zwp-

~u r=

oknr,rENArs0aA$e$A'

'Mk4,0L I

iNY.$Lk.',{...dth2-~rf&:eite.e.vyf,hL l

t.'.dkk.?h.hbu

, u -

.1

,w.-aMo t Y.r' 1

j'.'

{

~

j

/ f Y *) ;

    • ' 5" l9 y

s e

v s

  • J S h /..

.j'-

ff

,f

!J

/l, 'w/W'h/ ) A>P 2% TL.D ;

9-im &,

,a1 &.. w -2rie, 6 w :ag s w.1 % l-;~~-

a g[$'

a A

'a

)*

s; y

y'

$:. ' ? 'Qf:.'.k.Y,.i? :ibi;N cv$.h*' f $.~... ~' 'h5. t.'2'f C' T

a/A h ad'k,85::*r A. 9d+mond'a m m l$ & C 0 w,e E ci i

&/35<,Gk.;,ied(W a

7. g. 2 : w d a! h 11.' 'a r/ 9.

p. 5 % 4 M t

1 9

/s fs a

%G. <@?,c p s.,:,w:-c a. M h.o y':. C,.

aa y

' *b th,.

ibp'.i y *.t..e c,{ o,'),&.,Q,/lb:1e

' 2..utr' r=

m

. s,

/

Yhf(/L1/ $ n i,!1 kl'd.**1!! cvb' '&' [r/'4.E!!. E 'l" c

> Y N O 7H'$A5 $_.T S 15 l&"

\\

u...)e.c a '. n.. m al6 $ $ f / kr,V. J.;

a..rd.r s M

' ~ ~~~

**~ ~

    • ~

f

_g, go

,_,,g,

6 f,

';,?..i ~.

.4.-

@!i

  • ~.

s e-O

>....n;.

es a W..,;.

M

./

..I.. E,. A

'Zr9b f'7YAUn._

WA 0

'l t/.1_)./

,a g?! Y R4 df>t-<%

.r.. LA t

=h

h.,_

YA 0,. h.A_ b.'Y O_._

E'4/f.'At'%

._-- '% v1'rI %

f b /N),Y _

h.

b

/m 4,k' L

WA Y/ '

&, +.,a.

&g..yR,n.cuk,h.,paew%e_ M

.1 r

b A

N' '. -

.=b.if:'J H) 1/?L b's('

nam-40'ff / nidh ef g Y.

T/.dI-2 asce[bs/Mvv Y s 2@ m.ao

.. d L

_a

.n:

A. L eer n

h.iNJ D I-$ sv1 tskl1 Wv!

$h.~ Aea aussandt,.

, A n ??

4

. 2//hta,;

fP,-

4Afike

=<

Ih 5

).5 Y

=.2..

/

. Ch_,3astgr &,. 'a e&a/

^

f..E ' Yl!!-E-Ceti_/s ' J N kmtsda L At

,e

._ a.(; g h t f d / l } L 0 s d w. b. h$ #r0./&.

n m k d,h Q*vS****l

/ G't Y $,t.h,g ka,ssA a-k u n.,.

W,,, e rn n

s 2,1.*ns'.;rard,$s.f.g,{$.e(**.p

_ l.. m./,.fC. _/ __,m._.,......_ 3 3

' ^ '

,, ' A n:* f.h. )t **Z*?.: j? s.) W e l 0 N

  • _0__..N',

' ' / _lG _ t..e

~

's '

Y l--

7..

- 7_1..'[a -_ Q-7,.r.%>,.v.,

l n

,,1

_l Y

4

.mo

. 9..<, m_. :.:..,. a. L,L....ir e t ~. Q u.v.

2,.,

j.,.n.

?

~~

~-

ag a

de g

'O 9

r c

f

[

q.

n M,

Xh.c.:L (( $ N Y 7a1,,-2 W 02$ mhlh1LLb? f.

a., Ac+p.cmna 77v

- m. c a. M.,. 7 iA '.

AY Zwl0xh%)

f$Y1$bNY n

a s p a m s a m L -a s9 W$

&dAdn.& >rfaA. Avi. AN%

M8AL dka Ad o

b@l $

_ $* % f.., % z [ k s i S - b. m a u t p p m w.u

  1. ,5,

,-g t k u. _ d s e k d u es a' r. k u. f.

_ e _

v50 k **

t s.

k & A wsw.fa 6 J ao.p.a J.91 dia(_mbsA?aBOre 'w2 ue ka ni$+wnwd8&

e66 s

ti m v x v x & a ta k :., & e n,

0i

/b>-lu? ' W.48(e/f

.sek7pg,nLfEt A P.qj;7 t

Y dl m n WruE' % & acp / ch e..

-n

  • d(

.stzeA WAwndnM nsu& rA d</wetabww-s A

xn

,a ksaaf f d & WM L.s t,ar64

'V

&(A.&=eh.yA2ece.a.a4fuf-cf.dd$ei$

WA

. ffch /k.5 3A.. N,,etkcAp).7 ( $.

a s l mu su?ubtwwn'

..&gn..sw. p.i

~~

g

.bgb'!.b$2$..,ke:'

?kk.f,LZ6Blk.J.?

bW-%-.

.s -

j[? Y,.'NbY y$

/N NO*.W.,e(,.eV 'l$.*-

a, f~".-.._.Ahf_tfLeend,c,Nn$4~Wnchd$,uAb..>m 0

c

W-p e,% g*

/

ammsn apa4A-ay

, snu~

saw

  1. e) x A ? s. u c - e w s d u

/

' a $ ed F. A A.p rb.L sur% 3 Ynt/.sc7n

-/rmous r

~Q m perfro n~c&nf 7ausnge,m -

ic ca/t.

SC56m/~w V isuZCiu S.

2) J eka/ % 2lh '&ak < ndVAh, 9 2A

.admeffanaut% a /koaA.

4))Alwv4RK m f m//w m.

3 tam'.nG4 9 6ysea aa/&e Vs -i k L x M.;&

g s

noe M 's"A d %<d e n.-

,~ & #

% ( nlc.s t~ M ) /c a y ; d w aa e

4)$ w !,ies?

/

Jeae%Mp auJ farabapspa%v/mE.e Mka /

WM

~

y in ain.J L

Lc nxj;ra'%

L wd MRe.n dLe anXno04 ShM 8 $d '

ab &

ennad

,f' r, ese~s y

- at

/ ). A.c g w;u x - m u % d.e x (di/w /?rdf)

, tsw

\\

z7wfwwkduem(2a///aa[d/r{a a e se m a, e swax u )a coi M l/ s u w -m.

.s g+2L. op..*.a.. /14%f e M, (k n/p/d<h.

m n

as~. ww

,.-nc w,

An;Mdv%m.as,o. e-as e c:a:b s-m.w' a...u..,.. u. n.

.k

p. 3.nvm +s-w -

w ~.

(LCttOr from CentOra for D; con;9 Control under Aamodt FOIA request)page 2), provid;d to Dr. Bruce Molholt,(see

.lanuary 7, 1985 M

trol over the Nuclear our review at the Aamodt study. Upon In reply to your December 11 letter, I have no con about expresses ruservationa about Regulatory Comeission's statementsreviewing my letter (copy en it d the the data collection, the analysis, anthose reservations.

AAmodt report.

[ etill have I hAVe no inf ormation about reconfirm uere not in the point.

study. Thone data Vere With regard to your first the cancer deaths reconfirmed?

cancer desche after completion of the The question remains if the cancers were proven by rissue how were The THI Mile Island (THI) Accident?

medical records reviewed to ascertain report.

examination and diagnosed g the T reef a cancer if the cancer was diagnos h

3,-

d afterwards.

Accident cannot be blamed as the cause oeven though the death suy have occurreth the before the WI Accident, f

Even if some of the cancer cases were diagnosed a tert and date of diagn d

relatively brief latent period between the acci entheories of human cancer with most current (lees than 6 years) is inconsistent latent pe ri od.

development that assume a longer average (60%) the as reviewed 12 of 20 death certificateswee diagnosed with h

F.ven though M ^s when the patient have not had, important data item iAlso, A (40%) of the 20 cancer deathsof their death certific the patient died.

i according to your letter, even a rev ew then eht=~

firmed by medient records, that if all the deaths were con increene.

I do agreee statistically eignificant

~

ylvAnia SCAte I)epartmetnC of sould be We have continued to collaborare with the Penn>likely exposed population l

i n inquiring We collaborated on a census of this popu at opas Health to follow-up the roost around the TH1 site.

about evacuation, time spent of Health has continued this follow-up.

in the area, The State Departnant history.

/

s Page 2 - Dr. Bruce Holholt Finally, suspicions of an increased f requency of disease should be reported to 1 -/

h the State Department of health for their evaluation since by law t ey aro CDC will help the State investigste such suspicions when the re s ponsible.

State requests it.

Sincerely yours, Glyn C. Caldwell H.D.

Assistant Director for Epidemiology Chronic Disespee Division Center for Environmental Health Enclosure cc:

Dr. Zack Dr. Tokukata Dr. Hills 6080D

.DC CEH:CDD:CCaldwellsdk:1/2/85: Doc.

C L

9

\\ _, -

-

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20129E268&oldid=4251621"