ML20245A939

Responds to Ltr Re Operation of Plant Under Conditions of Temp Inversion & News Article on Cancer Incidence in Longview & Kalama.Facility Has Air Cleaning Sys That Remove Some Natural Alpha Emitters

ML20245A939
Person / Time
Site:	Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png
Issue date:	06/16/1989
From:	Holahan G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Larry Jones AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
References
NUDOCS 8906220286
Download: ML20245A939 (4)

Text

- _ - _ _ _ _ _ .

/ UNITED STATES

/!"' n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f $ ;f WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

\ *****/ June 16, 1989 Mr. L. A. Jones ,

2231 NW 62nd Seattle, Washington 98107

Dear Mr. Jones:

This is in response to your recent letter regarding the operation of the Trojan Nuclear Plant under conditions of a temperature inversion, and regarding news articles discussing cancer incidence in Longview and Kalama.

You correctly observed that the Trojan plant continues to operate during i temperature inversion conditions and that certain inversions can force  !

emissions to the ground. Inversion corditions prevail about 5 percent of 1 the time at most places so it is not practical to shut the plant down when I inversions develop. To accommodate continuous operations, releases from J nuclear power plants are limited so they are safe even under adverse i meteorological conditions. In establishing the permissible releases from I Trojan, it was assumed that all releases are at ground level, so the occasional set of conditions that brings the effluents to the ground is not a cause for concern.  !

You expressed special concern about possible alpha-emitting radioactive materials in the Trojan effluents, Although nuclear power plants do produce j alpha emitters, experience shows that practically none of these alpha emitters i are released. To ensure that any releases are within regulatory limits the i effluents are regularly sampled and analyzed for alpha emitters. Naturally i occurriilg alpha emitters are constantly present in the air we breathe, primarily in the form of radon and fts daughter products. Trojan, like other nuclear power plants, has air cleaning systems that remove some of the natural alpha ,

emitters, so that the Trojan gaseous effluent may actually contain less alpha {

activity than does the surrounding air.

)

St. Joseph's Hospital in Longview can be justly proud of its cancer treatment facility. Its existence, however, should not be taken as an indication that the cancer incidence is unusually high in the region. Since cancer accounts for almost 20 percent of deaths in the United States, the hospital at Longview likely serves cancer patients from well beyond that immediate vicinity. While cancer death rates are declining (except for lung cancer, which is largely i attributed to cigarettes), the decline is slow and the cancer treatment facility l at Longview is likely to continue to be busy without a single cancer induced by '

the Trojan plant.

You also expressed interest regarding possible surveys that would show any l increase in cancer after the startup of a nuclear power plant. While there is an abundance of scientific evidence showing that effluents from nuclear power i plants are held at safe levels, there cannot be a direct measure of a zero j effect in a community. l b

8906220206 890616 )

PDR ADOCK 05000344 H PDR D 1

, ,- Mr. L. A. Jones June 16, 1989 l

l Several such surveys have been attempted, but the results have been inconclusive, in that there has been no measurable increase due to the plant. Proving the absence of an effect with an epidemiological study is practically impossible because the size of the necessary sample increases as the effect decreases.

The number of people living near a nuclear power plant is far too small to show any effect from the small radiation doses they receive. Studies of the survivors of the two nuclear bombs used in World War II indicate the difficulty.

While thousands of people received large doses of radiation, a 25 year study (between 1950 and 1975) revealed a cancer increase of less than 5 percent.

l Several years ago the NRC conducted a study to try to identify groups of people l

who might be studied to improve our understanding of cancer induction by radiation. A major consideration was the complication introduced by the fact that cancer incidence is different for essentially every identifiable group.

Cancer incidence varies with sex, age, race, nationality, geography, and life-style as well as with the degree of exposure to known carcinogens such as sunlight, and certain foods. Furthermore, although everyone is exposed to radiation, the dose varies greatly from one person to another; the variation in natural radiation is much greater than the radiation received by members of the public from nuclear power plants. It was concluded that surveys of the communities near nuclear power plants would not be of significant value. Even a study of the people who work in nuclear plants and receive, on the average, several times more radiation than the general public showed no promise of increasing our radiobiological knowledge.

I hope this letter provides the information you need. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance.

Sincerely, AJcty V ~

Gary M. Holahan, (A) Director Division of Reactor Projects III, IV, V and Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation t

4 I

i.

4 .Mr.'L. A. Jones June 16, 1989 Several such surveys have been attempted, but the.results have been inconclusive, in that there has been no measurable increase due to the plant. Proving the absence of an effect with an epidemiological study is practically impossible because the size of the necessary sample increases as the effect decreases.

The number of people living near a nuclear power plant is far too small to show any effect from the small radiation doses they receive. Studies of the survivors of the two nuclear bombs used in World War 11 indicate the difficulty.

While thousands of people received large doses of radiation, a 25 year study (between 1950 and 1975) revealed a cancer increase of less than 5 percent.

Several years ago the NRC conducted a study to try to' identify groups of people who might be studied to improve our understanding of cancer induction by radiation. A major consideration was the complication introduced by the fact that cancer incidence is_.different for essentially every identifiable group.

Cancer incidence varies with sex, age,. race, nationality, geography, and life-style as well as with the degree of exposure to known carcinogens such as sunlight, and certain foods. Furthermore, although everyone is exposed to radiation, the dose varies greatly from one person to another; the variation in natural radiation is much greater than the radiation received by members of the pr511c from nuclear power plants.. It was. concluded that surveys of the communities near nuclear power plants would not be of significant value. Even a st.dy of the people ~who work in nuclear plants and receive, on the average, several times more radiation.than the general public showed no promise of increasing our radiobiological knowledge.

I hope this letter provides the information you need. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance.

Sincerely, original signed by Gary Holahan Gary M. Holahan, (A) Director Division of Reactor Projects III, IV, Y and Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation DISTRIBUTION - . ~ . . .

[DocketF11e.(50-344);

R. Bevan w/cy of incoming G. Holahan J. Lee M. Virgilio D.Mossburg,PMAS(0899076)

G. Knighton NRC PDR & LPDR w/cy of incoming T. Murley/J. Sniezek J. Partlow

• See previous concurrence

[YELLOWTICKET 0899076]

DRSP/PD5* DRSP/PD5* g DRSP/D:PD5 (A)AD: RSP:35 A)D:DRSP JLee RBevan:dr GWKnighton MJVirgilio j GMHolahan 6/14/89 6/14/89 6/if/89 6/p/89 6/d/89

,. .. /

,~ . /

.- Mr..L. O. Jones /

Several such-surveys have been attempted but, when the data are analyzed ,

carefully, they are found to prove nothing (except that there has been no/

measurable increase due to the plant). Proving the absence of an effect'with an epidemiological study is practically impossible because the size of'the necessary sample increases as the effect decreases. The number of people living near a nuclear power plant is far too smal? to show any effect from the small radiation doses they receive. Studies of the survivors'of the two nuclear bombs used in World War II indicate the difficulty. While thousands of people received large doses of radiation, 25 years of careful study f (between 1950 and 1975) reveal a cancer increase of less than 5 percent.,

Several years ago the NRC conducted a study to try to idenkify groups of people who might be studied to improve our understanding of cancer induction by radiation. A major. consideration was the complication introduced by the fact that cancer incidence is different for essentially every identifiable group.

Cancer incidence varies with sex, age, race, nationality, religion, and life-style as well as with the degree of exposure to known carcinogens such as sunlight, bacon, and beer. Furthermore, everyone is exposed to radiation but the dose varies greatly from one person to another; the variation in natural radiation is much greater then the radiation, received by members of the public from nuclear power plants. It was concluded that surveys of the communities '

near nuclear power plants would be of no value. Even the people who work in the plants, and receive on the average several times more radiation than do people off site, showed no promise of increasing our radiobiological knowledge.

I hope this letter provides the inforination y::u need. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. -

Sincerely,

, Gary M. Holahan, (A) Director Division of Reactor Projects III, IV, Y and Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation DISTRIBUTION Docket File (50-344) R. Bevan w/cy of incoming G. Holahan J. Lee M. Virgilio D. Mossburg, PMAS (08990/6)

G. Knighton NRC PDR & LPDR w/cy of incoming T. Murley/J. Sniezek J. Partlow

[YELLOWTICKET 0899076]

' PD5 DRSP/PD5 DRSP/D:PD5 (A)AD:DRSP:35 (A)D:DRSP J RBevan:dr GWKnighton MJVirgilio GMHolahan 6/ 89 6/ /89 6/ /89 6/ /89 6/{/89

/