Part 1 of 2 Parts
More than a decade ago, staffers at the NRC began asking for an update to an outdated 1990 study on the possibility that nuclear power plants caused increase rates of cancer in people who lived near the plant. The 1990 study was based on even older data. The NRC contracted with the National Academy of Sciences which is a separate federal agency. They request that the NAS design a modern scientific assessment in 2010.
In 2010, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) launched a pilot study to research the occurrence of cancer near nuclear power plants. It was intended to be the most comprehensive such study ever undertaken. The study was funded to the tune of eight million dollars. One and a half million dollars was spent but five years later in 2015, the project was killed because the NRC decided that it would ultimately be too expensive and that it would not be able to link cancer to nuclear power plants. Last week, a petition with twelve hundred signatures was presented to members of Congress from Southern and Central California demanding that the study be resumed.
The petition states, “This is a scientific endeavor which will improve our understanding of cancer, the leading cause of death in California,” the petition states. “It is especially important for women, children, and the human fetus who are much more vulnerable to the biological effects of harmful ionizing radiation.”
The petition went on to point out that the retired San Onofre and Diablo California nuclear power plants were both shut down in 2013. They had been discharging low-level radioactivity into the ocean and atmosphere for decades. No one knows for sure whether or not such discharges posed a threat to the health of people living nearby. The petition said, “The most recent research in the United States was carried out 29 years ago and is now considered heavily flawed and outdated. More recent studies in Europe have reported an increase in cancer risks for those living near nuclear power plants.”
The Samuel Laurence Foundation (SLF) is a nonprofit that “strives to promote human interaction and encourage broader community access to science, education, and the arts.” It has been highly critical of what has happened at the San Onofre nuclear power plant as the plant is decommissioned. The SLF headed up the signature gathering effort for the petition.
The petition was presented to U.S. Reps. Mike Levin, D-San Juan Capistrano; Katie Porter, D-Irvine; Harley Rouda, D-Laguna Beach; and Salud Carbajal, D-Santa Barbara. Levin said in a prepared statement, “I support investing in federal research to better understand cancer risks associated with nuclear facilities, and I’m proud that members of my San Onofre Task Force are leading this effort. This will be one of my priorities for future appropriations bills.” Rouda agreed with Levin. He said “We must study the health risks associated with proximity to SONGS and find long-term solutions to secure our nation’s nuclear waste. He mentioned that the three million six hundred thousand pounds of nuclear waste at San Onofre is only one hundred feet from the shoreline and sit on top of active fault lines. He considers it a serious threat to families in the area. To date, the NRC has declined to make any comment with respect to the petition.
Please read Part 2 next