.

Oyster Creek to be Included in Pilot Cancer Study

As requested by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the National Research Council is developing a study that will analyze the cancer risks in populations near nuclear plants

Oyster Creek Generating Station may be included in a pilot study of cancer risks in populations in close proximity to nuclear facilities.

The National Research Council will conduct the two-phase study, which was requested and will be funded by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), on the 104 nuclear reactors and 13 fuel cycle facilities licensed throughout the country.

Phase one will identify scientific approaches for the study while phase two, if the NRC chooses to proceed, would actually carry it out.

The study is a follow-up to one that was done in 1990 by the National Cancer Institute that had limitations and is now outdated, said John Burris, chair of the committee that wrote the report and president of Burroughs Wellcome Fund. That finding stated, “If nuclear facilities posed a risk to neighboring populations, the risk was too small to be detected by a survey such as this one.”

"Finding scientific evidence of whether people who live near nuclear facilities have a greater risk of developing cancer than those who live farther away is a challenge," Burris said. "There are issues of whether scientists can get the information needed to carry out the study.”

Some cancer registries only contain recent data and data could be insufficient to estimate the amount of radioactive material released from nuclear facilities, he said.

“This makes it much more difficult to determine risks from decades ago when radiation releases from nuclear facilities were larger," Burris said. 

The research council proposed two approaches to the study—one would investigate rates of cancer occurrence and cancer deaths in small geographic areas within 30 miles of nuclear facilities; the other would be to conduct a record-based case-control study to assess the association of cancers in children under 15 years old in relation to their mothers’ residential proximity to the facility during pregnancy.

Both approaches would have a sub-analysis focusing on leukemia, a form of cancer associated with radiation exposure in children.

A report released by the research council identifies potential challenges in the study, including uneven availability of data. After phase one is presented, the NRC will decide to move forward or forego the study.

If the NRC chooses to move forward, the research council would conduct a pilot study with six nuclear power plants, including Oyster Creek, and one fuel cycle facility.

“One of the recommendations from the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) in the report issued last week includes a pilot study that would obtain effluent release and meteorology data for six nuclear power plants and one nuclear fuel production facility,” Neil Sheehan explained. “The data would then be studied along with cancer incidence and mortality information for the surrounding 50 kilometers.”

The NRC is still reviewing the research council’s report, he said. After a public comment period regarding the initial report is completed, the NRC will decide on the next step. The study’s inception would be a multi-year initiative.

Sheehan could not say what actions could be taken if a link is found between cancer and nuclear power plants.

“It is too early to say what changes, if any, could result from the study’s ultimate findings,” he said. “At this stage, the work is concentrated on designing how the research should be accomplished.”

Numerous studies have been done analyzing the connection between cancer and the proximity of nuclear power plants, Oyster Creek spokesperson Suzanne D’Ambrosio said.

“Studies have been done showing no plausible link,” she said. “Take that into consideration along with the fact that everything that goes out into the atmosphere and environment by air, water and ground is completely monitored and regulated, not just by Oyster Creek but throughout the whole industry.

“As always we stand by the safety of Oyster Creek,” she said.

Janet Tauro, a member of Grandmothers, Mothers and More for Energy Safety (GRAMMES), commended the NRC for requesting the research.

“My hopes are absolutely that the study will move forward because it’s long overdue to have a really well conducted official study,” she said.

The announcement of a possible cancer study is a “360” for GRAMMES, she said.

“We’re back to where we started,” Tauro said. “The reason we formed and banded together was because we were very concerned about an independent study conducted by the Radiation Public Health Project.”

Joseph Mangano conducted the Baby Teeth Study, which found elevated levels of Strontium-90 in baby teeth collected by residents living within the 50-mile radius of nuclear plants, she said. Members of GRAMMES actually participated in the study.

Although the findings were disregarded by the nuclear industry, it indicated that further study was needed, she said.

“It indicated that we’re being exposed to low level radiation from plants and we need to determine whether or not it leads to elevated cancer rates,” she said.

Officials of the German and French governments have funded studies that found a correlation between pediatric leukemia in areas around power plants, she said.

“The National Academies of Science has stated no level of continuous radiation exposure is safe and that it will lead to health consequences,” Tauro said.

Frequent calls by parents who are concerned about the number of children afflicted by cancer in communities surrounding Oyster Creek are made to the New Jersey Environmental Federation, said Tauro, also the Board Chair of NJEF.

“Citizens have called for this study for years and years,” Tauro said. “We have to get to the bottom of this equation. It’s a fundamental question that needs to be answered.”

On April 1, the National Academy of Science began a 60-day public comment period.

“Comments submitted about the report's proposed methodologies will be used to inform the design of the next phase of study and will be placed in the project's public access file, which can be made available to the public upon request,” Sheehan said.

Comments can be submitted to crs@nas.edu or faxed to 202-334-3077.

The research institute’s report and a brief summary of the report are attached to this story as PDFs.

More information can be found click here.

Mo April 06, 2012 at 10:57 PM
about dam time someone looks into the high amounts of Cancer around this hell hole...i for one know the power plant is to blame for my daughter having cancer
Mo April 07, 2012 at 01:16 AM
Who the hell cares about your hair...just means you OLD.....When you see your 13 month old child almost die because of Cancer then talk to me....The power plant has done nothing for this town except cause problems...there are way to many children in this town and the surrounding area fighting cancer...just close the place down...all they do is lie, cheat, and steal.....mainly stealing the lives of children.
Mo April 07, 2012 at 03:03 AM
D'Most Balddouche' commented on the article Oyster Creek to be Included in Pilot Cancer Study "I bet you could spell before the plant came to town. Hey I had a full head of hair before I started working there." Whats wrong Mr. Most Afraid someone might read this that works with you....to Bad you can't remove your comment now
Mo April 07, 2012 at 03:33 AM
on a side note...if this was Mr Dave Most from the town board...why don't you care about the kids with cancer in lacey
Mo April 07, 2012 at 03:34 AM
D'Most Balddouche' commented on the article Oyster Creek to be Included in Pilot Cancer Study "I bet you could spell before the plant came to town. Hey I had a full head of hair before I started working there."
grace April 07, 2012 at 01:18 PM
its about time! my water smells like chlorine...side note.....i wish we had a fighter in town like linda gillick from toms river...she has done wonderful things for toms river, we are in need of a fighter like her....and most works at the plant. thats all he cares about .
TP April 07, 2012 at 01:54 PM
Results depend on who is performing the study, what their agenda is and what outcome they want. If the agenda is to shut down nuclear power the results will reflect higher cancer rates.
Project Bluebeam April 07, 2012 at 02:07 PM
People fight against nuclear power but don't even raise an eyebrow as Monsanto slowly poisons them.
TP April 07, 2012 at 02:59 PM
Great point PB! For those tragically are affected family members with serious diseases google Monsanto. You're being distracted by the mainstream and lead in the wrong direction. On a related note STOP using "Roundup" to kill your weeds. Use white vinegar! It's all about money!!!!! Your beloved "environmentalists" are all poisoned by it.
Winston Smith April 07, 2012 at 09:40 PM
Project bluebeam: i agree with you but we are being hit from so many sides at once we need to pick our fights, no one can do it all. I Know what PBB is btw
Winston Smith April 07, 2012 at 09:43 PM
Round Up should be outlawed in coastal areas at the very least. That garbage goes right into the bay and lakes in Lacey.
Dave Sleeper April 08, 2012 at 05:11 AM
The what? Did you say the National Research Council? "JOKE!!" Let me go out on a limb and make a wild ass prediction about the findings. The "Research Council" will find that the cancer rate is 2-3 times higher in areas of close proximity to nuclear power plants. Same crap they've been coming out with for years. This is just the same old retreaded Anti-nuke folks coming at you from a different angle. Check them AND their funding out. http://www.nationalacademies.org/nrc/

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »