REPLYS FROM DR STERNGLASS & DR GOULD RE National Cancer Institute STUDY OF CANCERS AROUND REACTORS

From: MSSEJS@aol.com
To: smirnowb@ix.netcom.com
Cc: jbbrown@gate.net; JayMGould@aol.com; Odiejoe@aol.com;
Toxdocjs@aol.com; hdsharma@golden.net
Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2000 6:08 PM
Subject: NCI STUDY OF CANCERS AROUND REACTORS

Dr Sternglass wrote:

 Bill:

 You should know that our book"The Enemy Within" by Jay M Gould et al. (Four Walls Eight Windows, NY 1996) shows that in fact there was a large and highly significant increase in breast cancer mortality rates not only around all old DOE facilities with nuclear reactors of 37% between 1950-54 and1985-89 compared with a 1% rise for the U.S. as a whole (Table7-1, page 129) but also a highly significant rise for all nuclear reactors when the area studied is extended to a 50 mile radius (Table 7-2, page 131).

 The original NCI methodology used only one or two counties for each reactor, and compared the rate of cancer deaths with 3 selected counties, a majority of which were adjacent to the county with reactors, so that they all rose together, allowing the NCI to say that with the methodology used, "there was no difference between reactor and control counties". The book is available at low cost from Jerry Brown, Executive Director of RPHP.. (jbbrown@gate.net) or any internet book site.

 Ernest J. Sternglass
 mssejs@aol.com

     please refer to Appendix D of the Rphp publication of The Enemy Within: the High Cost of living Near Nuclear Reactors for a demonstration of the dishonesty of the NCI and the infamous Jablon report that with their bizarre methodology no one could find evidence of harm because they compared each county in which a reactor was placed with a "control" county near another reactor assuming that emissions would not ever cross county boundaries.

 Also, Bill why dont you tell those on your valuable list serve about our web site www.radiation.org which now carries the definitive article published by the Johns Hopkins Shool of Public Health on the results of our Tooth Fairy Project

----Jay M Gould

   Does anyone have data as to just how NCI is funded? NCI's statement & NRC's acceptance thereof is an obvious murderous lie being perpetrated on the public. http://www.geocities.com/mothersalert/infant.html

They make no comment on the 10 DOE sites that NCI looked at & any cancer rates from "low-level" radiation. What do we make from this no comment policy re DOE sites?

 -Bill Smirnow

    Additionally, the National Cancer Institute, at the request of Congress, conducted a study1 of 52 nuclear power stations and 10 Department of Energy facilities.  The study concluded that there was no increase in cancers in the communities surrounding the nuclear power plants.

Mr. Smirnow:

Thank you for your comments on the renewal of nuclear power plants operating licenses received via the NRC website.

The Atomic Energy Act established a 40-year license term for power reactors, but also provided that such licenses could be renewed.  Public comment was sought when the regulations were amended in 1991 and 1995  to include a process for renewal in Part 54 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations.  Public comment was also sought when the associated environmental impact requirements in Part 51 were amended for license renewal in 1996.

The license renewal requirements provide for a plant-specific determination that aging effects can be adequately managed during the period of extended operation.  The NRC is currently seeking public comment on updated guidance for the evaluation of plant-specific applications for license renewal, including a report on generic aging lessons learned (GALL).  Recent media reports erroneously described this guidance as the only opportunity for public comment for license renewal.  The NRC requested comments on the updated renewal guidance by October 16, 2000 in preparation for a meeting of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission planned for December 5, 2000, to specifically discuss the extent to which existing inspection and maintenance activities need to be augmented for license renewal.

Comments on the license renewal guidance submitted after that date will be considered to the extent practical up to the time the proposed final guidance is submitted to the Commission for approval, presently scheduled for March 2001.

The license renewal process provides for individual hearings, public meetings and a request for public comment in the vicinity of each plant that submits a license renewal application.

Additional information about the license renewal process and related evaluation guidance is available on the NRC webpage at
http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/REACTOR/LR/index.html.

With respect to "low-level" radiation, NRC regulations require licensees to have effluent and environmental monitoring programs (to quantify releases and their impact on the environment) to ensure that the impacts from plant operations are minimized.  The results of these programs are reported annually and available to the public.  The permitted effluent releases result in very small doses to members of the public living around the plants (small fractions of the public dose limit).  Regional NRC inspectors routinely inspect these monitoring programs to ensure continued compliance with regulatory requirements.  Licensees are required to participate in an interlaboratory comparison program which provides an independent check on the accuracy and precision of the environmental measurements. Additionally, the National Cancer Institute, at the request of Congress, conducted a study [1] of 52 nuclear power stations and 10 Department of Energy facilities.
The study concluded that there was no increase in cancers in the
communities surrounding the nuclear power plants.

License Renewal and Standardization Branch
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

[1]: "Cancer in Populations Living Near Nuclear Facilities," Jablon, et al., National Cancer Institute, July 1990. [NIH Publication No. 90-874]