RE: Philly Residents Fight Planned Irradiator

["NIXON, Grant (Kanata)" <GNIXON@MDS.Nordion.com>]

Dear Sandy et al.



Regarding Public Citizen against industrial irradiators:



The actual number of incidents at industrial irradiators over the many

decades of operation represent a very small number by any objective measure

in comparison with other industries. Moreover, of these irradiator accident,

the majority are not related to radiation but are of a mechanical nature, as

one would expect in a highly-regulated industry. A likely example of an

accident would be, say, a pneumatic pusher crushing someone because the air

supplying the pusher was not dumped, in contravention of procedure. There

have been a small handful of radiological incidents in industrial

irradiators in the industry's 40 years. As one would expect, most of these

radiological accidents occurred as a result of tampering with safety systems

and not following procedure in order to gain access to the radioactive area.

Despite the excellent safety track record for industrial irradiators, the

industry continues to evolve, continuously-improving safety.



Public Citizen [an institution of low repute and with no scientific

credentials] goes on to cite a water contamination incident for an

industrial irradiator. While there was one such incident, it did not concern

a Co-60 unit. This incident concerned a specific pool-storage irradiator

which utilized sealed Cs-137 sources. This type of plant (and I never heard

of others) has long been banned in the industry.



Public Citizen argues that "irradiation" could cause cancer. Why is Public

Citizen is non-specific and what does this have to do with a cobalt 60

"irradiator"? They are simply planting the seeds of doubt, using a vague,

meaningless statement, hoping that people draw their own [negative]

inferences. Irradiators are used for the irradiation [e.g., of medical

products]. Irradiation [of humans] may be a cause cancer. So, they hope that

the mind [missing this slight of hand] links the words "irradiator",

"irradiation", and "cancer" [without the intervening qualifiers].

Spin-doctoring easy as 1-2-3!



Public Citizen argues that [Co-60] materials could be used to make a

radioactive "dirty bomb". This is an unqualified and unfounded statement

that runs counter to expert opinion. It is well-established in the industry

that attempting to convert sealed Co-60 sources into a dirty bomb is, in all

practical aspects, highly unfeasible. It is extremely difficult to handle

this material safely without a huge amount of shielding. There have also

been several tests conducted specifically with [non-radioactive] cobalt

sources, all of which point to the inherent safety of this technology. Even

if one somehow managed to breach a [double-encapsulated!] source with a high

explosive, it is virtually impossible to disperse cobalt metal in order to

form the required "radioactive cloud". Terrorists already know this [much to

their chagrin] and that is why they will likely concentrate their efforts

elsewhere.



Are we doing anybody a service in circulating such articles via listerves or

are we acting as accomplices in propagating misinformation? Our discussions

will never form part of a refutation in the popular press.



Grant



-----Original Message-----

From: Sandy Perle [mailto:sandyfl@EARTHLINK.NET]

Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 12:35 PM

To: nuclear news list

Subject: Philly Residents Fight Planned Irradiator





Index:



Philly Residents Fight Planned Irradiator

Subsidy needed to build new US nuclear plants-MIT

Radiation doses of Hiroshima survivors confirmed

No. of A-bomb patients in Nagasaki hospital at record high

==================================



Philly Residents Fight Planned Irradiator



PHILADELPHIA (AP) - Judy Szela said she found out about plans for a 

nuclear irradiator to be built in her sleepy suburban Bucks County 

community from an employee at the grocery store.



``I was upset because I didn't know anything about it, but as I 

started asking my neighbors, no one knew about it,'' she said. ``Then 

the more I started doing research, I was devastated. And afraid.''



Szela and her neighbors in Milford Township are waging a battle with 

local leaders and federal officials over a proposed irradiator that 

could be used to sterilize anything from meat to medical supplies. 

The neighbors fear terrorism, an accident or other risks to people 

and the environment.



A world away - near Brisbane, Australia - residents have been 

protesting a planned irradiator as well.



It is unclear whether either community will be able to halt the 

projects. Irradiators opened in Mulberry, Fla., in 1991, and in 

Schaumburg, Ill., amid opposition in 2001.



The Pennsylvania irradiator, if approved by the Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, would have an 18-foot-deep underground tank with a rack 

of the radioactive isotope cobalt 60 at the bottom. Items to be 

irradiated would be lowered into the roughly 6-foot-square tank for 

about 15 minutes.



Most of the 50 or so irradiators in the United States use cobalt 60.



Irradiators are used for such things as killing bacteria in meat and 

produce and sterilizing medical supplies and feminine products.



The government has long allowed irradiation of wheat and flour, to 

discourage pests, and of potatoes, to retard sprouting. Spices, pork, 

poultry and produce were approved for irradiation in 1985; beef was 

approved in 1997 and eggs in 2000.



Herbs, seasonings and spices accounted for 95 million of the 97 

million pounds of food irradiated annually in the United States, 

according to a January 2000 report by the General Accounting office, 

the most recent figures available.



The Food and Drug Administration in 1997 deemed irradiation a safe 

method of killing bacteria that can cause food poisoning. Three years 

later, irradiated ground beef was briefly offered in U.S. 

supermarkets but did not sell well. Now that the government has 

permitted irradiated beef to be sold in school lunches, however, that 

might mean more business for many irradiators.



The proposed 1,600-square-foot irradiator in Pennsylvania would be 

inside an existing 150,000-square-foot cold storage facility that is 

operated by CFC Logistics Inc., a subsidiary of the Clemens Family 

Corp., which also owns Hatfield Quality Meats.



CFC hopes to have the machine running by the fall, though the 

timetable is uncertain now that the citizens group has sued the 

township zoning board, claiming it granted variances to CFC in 2002 

for a cold storage facility - not an irradiator.



The consumer group Public Citizen, an opponent of irradiators, said 

that there have been dozens of accidents at irradiation facilities 

since they came into use in the 1960s. Among them, the group cites a 

1982 incident in Dover, N.J., in which workers poured 600 gallons of 

radioactive water down a drain that emptied into the public sewer 

system, and a 1988 leak in Decatur, Ga., that was contained but 

resulted in several exposed workers spreading radioactivity to their 

homes.



CFC and township officials say the equipment would pose no danger to 

the community.



``It's inherently safe,'' said CFC Logistics president Jim Wood. 

``The possibility of any accident or danger of any employees coming 

into contact with this material just isn't there.''



Residents disagree.



``Cobalt 60 is dangerous. It has to be replenished, it has to be 

transported, and our goal is to have it never come here,'' said 

Szela, a member of the citizens group who lives a few miles from the 

site. ``The weight of public outcry is very strong, and we are 

telling our elected officials that we don't want this.''



Public Citizen argues that irradiation could cause cancer, that the 

materials could be used to make a radioactive ``dirty bomb,'' and 

that concerns about food contamination should be addressed by making 

slaughterhouses more sanitary.



``Food irradiation is an unnecessary technology,'' said Monique 

Mikhail of Public Citizen. ``The question is why the residents of 

Milford Township should be forced to live with this threat in their 

back yards for something that's unnecessary?''



Township supervisor Charles Strunk suggested the fears stemmed from 

``a very rude and obnoxious group of outside agitators.''



``I can tell you that I wouldn't mind one bit living next door to 

it,'' he said. ``As far as terrorists go, anyone looking to steal 

radioactive materials would have better luck getting it from a 

hospital than from the bottom of a tank.''



On the Net:



CFC Logistics: http://www.cfclogistics.com/irradiation/default.htm



Public Citizen: http://www.citizen.org/cmep/foodsafety/



Milford Township: http://www.milfordtownship.org

************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/