
          Restarting Savannah River?
          By Connor, TimTim Connor
          Vol. 12, No. 5, 1990, pp. 6-7
          
          The Department of Energy (DOE) plans to resume operations in the
coming weeks at its three aging production reactors near the
Georgia-South_Carolina border. Brushing aside questions about the need
for the nuclear weapons materials, which the facilities produce, the
Department continues to downplay the environmental risks associated
with the reactors' restart.
          The planned restart comes in the aftermath of a report in which the
Energy Department concedes, for the first time, that people living
near another major nuclear weapons plant at Hanford, Wash. were
exposed to dangerous levels of radioactivity.
          In its recent report on Hanford, DOE acknowledges that the releases
of radioactive iodine posed the greatest health threat. Scientists
know radioactive iodine concentrates in the thyroid gland, causing
thyroid cancer and other diseases. Milk from cows grazing on
contaminated grass is the major source for radioactive iodine exposure
to humans. As the Hanford study indicates, infants and children--in
whose smaller thyroids the radioactivity is most densely
concentrated--are most vulnerable.
          
            Savannah River Deserves Scrutiny
          
          The news from Hanford should be of special interest to Georgians
and South Carolinians. The revelations at Hanford came about only
after years of efforts by citizen groups and journalists to force DOL
to release hundreds of environmental records that had been classified
for over 30 years. While it's not yet clear whether Savannah River's
closets contain the same skeletons, one thing is dear. We should be
demanding a thorough, independent study of the history of radiation
releases from Savannah River before nuclear materials production
resumes at the plant.
          Until now DOE, following in the footsteps of its predecessor--the
Atomic Energy Commission--has invoked national security to thwart
outside scrutiny of the environmental consequences of its
operations. And since its inception, the agency charged with producing
nuclear weapons has also exercised extraordinary control over the
study of radiation and its effects on human health.
          There is a growing consensus among scientists that low level
radiation causes more harm than previously thought. And we know that
people living downwind and downstream of weapons production and
testing sites like the Savannah River Site (SRS) have been exposed to
more radioactive materials than generally realized.
          
            Tritium Poses Threat at Savannah River
          
          Although the available records indicate smaller releases of
radioactive iodine from Savannah River than from Hanford, a closer
look is certainly needed. Among other things, current reports indicate
that releases of iodine-129--which remains in the environment for
millions of years--is a significant contributor to off-site
radiation.
          The highest releases from SRS are of tritium, a radioactive form of
hydrogen. Tritium may be the most invasive of all radioactive
substances, capable of entering the body by both inhalation and
absorption through the skin.
          As a production center for tritium, the facility has released
hundreds of times more tritium than other nuclear plants--including
Hanford.
          Dr. Karl Z. Morgan, who for 20 years chaired the International
Commission on Radiological Protection committee charged with setting
limits for internal radiation exposure, notes that the current
standards understate tritium's toxicity by as much as five times.
          Tritium levels in drinking water downstream from the Savannah River
plant are seven to 25 times higher than that measured in other water
supplies. Federal monitoring reports show high levels of tritium in
rainfall well beyond the Savannah River plant boundary, with Columbia,
S.C. having twice the average concentration of other southeastern
cities. Surface water samples from South_Carolina's Edisto River
suggest that tritium from the plant has contaminated that watershed as
well.
          
            Low-Level Radiation: New Studies, New Fears
          
          Tests that have been performed suggest the risk from radioactive
gases is much greater than generally thought. Former Savannah River
plant waste manager Bill Lawless stated that a 1982 test of
atmospheric dispersion failed to match the predictions of computer
models. The radioactive cloud, instead of breaking up near the site,
was still intact as it floated over Fayetteville, N.C.--200 miles
away.
          Studies also indicate high concentrations of other radioactive
elements dose to the SRS. Milk samples from nearby farms in Georgia
and South_Carolina regularly contain radioactive strontium-20 at
levels nearly double the national and regional average. Largemouth
bass caught in the Savannah River near the plant contain
concentrations 

of radioactive cesium-137 at levels many times that
measured in bass from other river systems.
          The accumulating evidence on low-level radiation continues to
demolish previous, official assurances of safety. The more we learn,
the more obvious it becomes that past practices and rhetoric were
misguided and dangerous. Recently, Britain's Radiological Protection
Board has dramatically reduced the acceptable radiation exposure
levels for workers in the U.K.
          The lesson of Hanford ought to be dear to those living in the
shadows of other nuclear weapons plants around the country. Especially
at facilities like the SRS, where DOE plans to continue producing
nuclear materials for years to come, an earnest effort involving
citizen participation and independent oversight to examine past and
present releases should be completed prior to making any decision on
restart.
          For more information about the Savannah River Plant and what you
can do, contact Ellen Spears at (404) 584-9902 or Jan Somers at (404)
491-8064.
          
            Tim Connor is an analyst for the Energy Research
Foundation, a non-profit research and educational organization. He
lives in Augusta, Ga.
          
        
