The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) released a report yesterday, suggesting what methods should be used to examine radiation exposure risks around nuclear facilities licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).

The report, Analysis of Cancer Risks in Populations near Nuclear Facilities: Phase 1, recognizing shortcomings of prior epidemiological studies, has recommended two methods to be conducted where available data exists. One method would provide a “broad investigation of both cancer incidence and mortality over the operational histories of nuclear facilities” and the other would attempt to provide a more focused assessment of cancer risk from exposure in early life during more recent operating periods.

The specific pilot sites recommended include nuclear facilities in Dresden, IL; Haddam Neck and Millstone, CT; Oyster Creek, NJ; Big Rock Point, MI; San Onofre, CA. All of these are nuclear power facilities. The final site, Nuclear Fuel Services in TN, is a fuel fabrication facility that creates the uranium fuel for nuclear power reactors.

“We commend the NAS for recognizing and attempting to accommodate the challenges of conducting these studies and for recommending what appears to be a much more scientifically defensible approach than has been used in the past. As with any thorough scientific investigation, the proof is always in the design and execution,” states Cindy Folkers, Radiation and Health Specialist with Beyond Nuclear.

The majority of 60 European studies, some of which are reviewed by the NAS panel for its report, demonstrate a pattern of childhood leukemia increases around nuclear facilities.

The report mentions non-cancer effects of radiation, but recommendations are given for assessing cancer risk only, in line with the charge given NAS by NRC.

“Non-cancer maladies should also be investigated,” said Kevin Kamps, Radioactive Waste Specialist at Beyond Nuclear. “There is strong evidence, for example, that rates of spina bifida, thyroid pathology, and even infant mortality were significantly elevated during reactor operations at Big Rock Point nuclear power plant in Michigan, one of the facilities on the pilot study list,” Kamps added. He serves as a board member of the state-wide anti-nuclear watchdog coalition, Don’t Waste Michigan.

The NAS has also recommended early public involvement in the research process, and suggests using the model this NAS committee used to engage the public. One member of the public, Joseph Sauer, MD, an obstetrician, and his spouse, Cynthia, gave comments during the NAS proceedings. The Sauers lived near the Dresden and Braidwood nuclear power facilities, and their daughter, Sarah, who also commented, is a childhood brain cancer survivor. See the Sauer family comments commending this report and those involved.

“The reality is these studies could have, and should have been done already, as has been done in Europe. It is solely NRC’s reluctance to conduct the kind of detailed, small-scale study needed to answer questions of risk, particularly for children living around nuclear facilities, that has caused a delay. Now it is time to move forward in a scientifically defensible way,” Folkers continues.

There will be a 60-day public comment period beginning April 1, 2012. Beyond Nuclear will be submitting specific comments on the technical assumptions and recommendations in the report during this time.

“We will be watching as these studies go forward. We will also encourage concerned citizens around these facilities to watch this process and participate as much as possible.” Folkers concludes.

–-30—