NRC says strontium-90 found in fish by nuclear plant on Connecticut River is not a conclusive indication of presence of strontium-90

Published: November 18th, 2011 at 8:16 am ET
By
Email Article Email Article
35 comments


NRC responds to concerns over Entergy strontium statements, Brattleboro Reformer, Nov. 18, 2011 (Emphasis Added):

In early August, the Vermont Department of Health revealed strontium-90 was detected in edible portions of fish taken from the Connecticut River, upstream of the power plant. [...]

The sample was just above the lower limit of detection but was the first time strontium-90 had been detected in the edible portion of any of the fish samples.

Larry Smith, Yankee’s director of communications

“There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that Vermont Yankee is the source for the strontium-90. We have 31 monitoring wells on site that are tested regularly. No groundwater sample from any well at Vermont Yankee has ever indicated the presence of strontium-90, or any other isotope other than tritium.”

NRC’s response to Congressman Ed Markey (D-MA)

“The licensee has reported to the NRC and made public information regarding past gaseous releases of Sr-90 within legal limits, but river water sampling subsequent to these reported releases to the atmosphere has not detected the presence of Sr-90 in the Connecticut River.”

The NRC states the findings presented by DOH “are too close to the level of uncertainty to be considered by themselves a conclusive indication of the presence of Sr-90.”

Because no strontium has been found in the groundwater monitoring wells, wrote the NRC, there is no need for further study of possible Sr-90 contamination from Vermont Yankee at this time.

Does the NRC care if Entergy is lying?

Markey also asked the NRC to look into “whether Entergy was lying in its Aug. 2 (2011) statement to the media or perhaps was lying in its May 2010 report to the NRC.”

In its response, the NRC stated its legal authority to determine the veracity of statements made by nuclear industry representatives “does not extend to regulating all public statements made by companies that hold NRC licenses.”

However, the NRC does require that information presented to it be complete and accurate in all material respects.

“This does not mean that the agency is unconcerned if licensee statements to the public are misleading or untrue. The NRC believes that all stakeholders involved in NRC-regulated activities should act in an open, honest, and transparent way, just as the agency seeks to do in its own action, and any failure by a licensee to do so could call into question the veracity of licensee information provided to the NRC.”

Entergy had no comment on the NRC letter.

 

Published: November 18th, 2011 at 8:16 am ET
By
Email Article Email Article
35 comments

Related Posts

  1. Radioactive fish found in Connecticut River — State officials trying to determine source of Strontium-90 August 2, 2011
  2. ????: Gov’t claims Strontium in Yokohama NOT from Fukushima because no short-lived Strontium-89 — Yet 59 Bq/kg was detected November 25, 2011
  3. WSJ MarketWatch: Cancer was “bound to happen” to animal grazing 5 miles downwind of Connecticut nuclear power plant August 27, 2012
  4. Officials in Connecticut warn of giant 16-foot storm surge, with 15-foot waves on top of that — State’s nuclear plant directly exposed on ocean (PHOTOS) October 29, 2012
  5. Workers “trying to understand scope of damage” at U.S. nuclear plant — Structural problems at Unit 1? — 500 ton device fell on water lines, electrical equipment — Reactors still using emergency generators April 1, 2013

35 comments to NRC says strontium-90 found in fish by nuclear plant on Connecticut River is not a conclusive indication of presence of strontium-90

    • The accident stopped the U.S. nuclear power industry in its tracks.

      No more nuclear plants were ordered in the United States following the accident and none started after 1974 were completed, former nuclear regulator Peter Bradford notes.
      “The credibility of an industry was lost,” Bruce Williams, a vice president of Exelon Nuclear, which now owns the Three Mile Island station, told a Pennsylvania newspaper in 2004.
      Thirty years later, the U.S. nuclear power industry is attempting a revival, citing reactors’ ability to generate electricity without the climate-threatening carbon emissions that spew from coal-fired generators. …
      http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/03/27/27greenwire-three-mile-island-still-haunts-us-reactor-indu-10327.html


      Report comment

  • bmurr bmurr

    maybe its from the vermont teddybear factory, or ben and jerry’s icecream? or maybe its from the stontium fairy???


    Report comment

  • Outrageous. They lied about the tritium leaks at the VT Yankee plant and got away with it. They lied about underground pipes. They ignored and covered up the rotting cooling tower until it collapsed. They find strontium 90 in the fish and their answer is that
    “you can’t prove that the strontium 90 came from us… maybe it isn’t even really in the river… anyway there isn’t enough evidence to justify anyone looking for for more evidence…would we lie?”

    The answer is yes… they would lie. Yes they released poison regularly through planned venting of gases and unplanned leaks from their decrepit rotting hulk of a reactor. SHAME ON THE NRC. SHAME ON ENTERGY. GOD BLESS ED MARKEY (Democratic congressman from Massachusetts) the only member of congress who is trying to keep the nuke industry from killing us all.


    Report comment

    • ion jean ion jean

      Well I can tell you the people of Vermont, many of whom here in the north don’t even get their power from this biblebelt vampire Entergy plant (we have HydroQuebec) have zero Patience left for these lying serial killers and the NRC can squabble all it wants with them till 3/12/12 when We The People will make sure it shuts down on schedule with no lIcence renewal.

      Y’see, it’s a GE Mark I with the same design flaws as FukU and with God as my witness this poison will never reach MY family.

      BTW Strontium 90 is the big dirty secret the govt wants to pretend does not exist because they already polluted the planet and us with it.


      Report comment

      • ion jean ion jean

        See how carefully their words are chosen to dance around the truth. Larry Smith is NOT Fred Astaire however and any cop worth his weight in donuts or judge worth his weight in golf balls should smell that rotten strontium stufFed fish!

        Perhaps he should gather his family’s water from the plant’s discharge pipe for awhile, then a simple urinalysis can check their exposure levels if he’s so sure.


        Report comment

      • ion jean ion jean

        Please check out SAGEalliance.net if you want to be involved.

        I think the local police have been bought by VY…the residents of Vernon are split in two: half make their living from VY while the other half are afraid of its impending isotopic slaughter…


        Report comment

    • … the NRC requires operators of plants found to be vulnerable to severe accidents to fix the problem “only if a cost-benefit analysis shows that the financial benefit of a safety backfit – determined by assigning a dollar value to the number of projected cancer deaths that would result from a severe accident – outweighs the cost of fixing the problem,” the report states. …
      http://globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=25757


      Report comment

    • aldo aldo

      Maybe it’s the only way they are able to tell those who are able to pay attention that the situation is FUBAR.


      Report comment

  • radegan

    Are you sure they didn’t make strontium bottles to go along with your radium bottles?


    Report comment

  • Whoopie Whoopie

    New Tweet:
    Gonna post the full paragraph:
    “All that considered­, please watch this video more than once. It goes by quickly enough that the real COMPLEXITY of the onsite water transfer and storage job might come off TOO LIGHTLY; consider the size of this site, and look at the overhead plan showing just how much area the tank system is taking up and how widespread it is. This would be a very important thing to consider, at least briefly, for any nuclear plant site — in other words, IF this kind of thing ever did happen on site, would there be enough space for tankage of a magnitude in correct proportion to the number of plants at that given site? If there are enough acres, are they level? Much in this video makes one stop and think on the second viewing.
    http://www.youtube.com/user/AtomicPowerReview


    Report comment

    • Pallas89juno Pallas89juno

      Dear Whoopie: I’m definitely going to listen to this. I think people all over the planet should be equally concerned about several things, as many in here are, on the topic of radionuclides in our drinking water: a) is any surface sources watershed drinking water at all UNcontaminated? b) if contaminated, can drinking water be filtered clean? (the answer is mostly, to an absolute “no” depending on the isotopes involved and the filtration and whether or not the filtration media or reverse osmosis membrane is changed frequently) Is, and this should have been “a”, how much more serious is internalized/ingested/drank/breathed in radionuclide contamiantion than that which falls as rain or dust (before being internalized through inhalation? I get absolutely no response when I ask companies like Arrowhead if their drinking (distilled or reverse osmosis) is free of radionuclide contamination. No response in writing at all, or even phone calls, is not a good response from such entities. They can claim, in writing, and have often that when their product is distilled or is run through reverse osmosis that there product contains absolutely no, not even the slightest trace, of toxic chemical (e.g., Dioxin) residues. There is none. They cannot at all make this claim for water when it comes to radionuclides. I feel like anyone inspecting the internal operations or conducting publicized tests on drinking water would be treated like the roster of murdered meat inspectors over the years, the latest here in the Bay Area of California were four meat inspectors killed at a meat processing plant here in Oakland CA several years ago. It does all boil down to money and the exploitative systems we all give our blessing to, passively perhaps, being ongoing.


      Report comment

      • Pallas89juno Pallas89juno

        Humans, most, will die, literally, if they go more than 48 or so hours without water. Our operating efficiency and our mental capacity dwindles with only very slight dehydration. Yet, there is no clean drinking water for anyone out there any longer unless one has access to fossil water? This does not include me or anyone else in here probably. There are some municipalities, but very few, that just use fossil water for drinking water for previously good reasons. The world’s HUMANS (workers) should force universal access to the fossil waters of the GMMRP (The Great Man Made River Project) that NATO so clumsily stomped into Libya for (it had ZERO do to with Khaddafi people) The people of the planet must demand and force a law through which says that no fossil water sources, which should not be used for agriculture and should be immediately banned from use for any industrial procedure where that water is fossilized human drinking water.

        We can see by the largely altogether utterly failed AREVA de-ionizing radiation machinery, that we do not have the technology to take radionuclides out of water. If we do, there will be residual media (filters/membranes/processing containers) that must, nonetheless–given current technologies–be treated as some level of nuclear waste, which means, such must be processed in some way. Are people getting the picture of how serious this situation is away from the ENE site? I think whomever is controlling the inclusion of “headlines” in here is not getting it and I don’t think the administration of this website is any longer “independent” of the government. The headlines would be different, I think and more controversial and the torque encouraged in these posts would be different. I just want to go on record as saying, I’m aware that not only is ENE surveilled, which goes for any website on any topic in the passive surveillance sense, but is being actively managed in terms of content.


        Report comment

        • Pallas89juno Pallas89juno

          http://www.globalresearch.ca btw does not believe that anthropogenic thermal maximum is real…that makes me feel a bit dubious about any content coming from there. I think there is a lot of, not very oft thought of, analyses there that are realistic; but the fact that their “researchers” get the thermal maximum thing wrong indicates that the site is clearly just a CIA created thing (or Mosad/MI5 whatever) for the more intelligent human out there. Prison Planet is a sight for those slightly less intelligent, NPR and PBS for those who think they’re intelligent but have stopped learning in many cases and MSNBC (General Electric–Mark I Reactor), CNN, network news are for the low-middle intelligent and Faux News (Fox News) for the lowest common denominator. Just putting that out there to help people get the picture where they are unaware.


          Report comment

  • … According to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the accident resulted in no deaths or injuries to plant workers or members of nearby communities. …
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Mile_Island_Nuclear_Generating_Station

    …[official U.S. government story that the Three Mile Island accident posed no threat to the public.]…
    http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/04/03-9


    Report comment

    • Whoopie Whoopie

      Posting to HP. Thanks Doc.


      Report comment

    • Documented discrepancies

      The Thompsons aren’t the only ones who have produced evidence that the radiation releases from TMI were much higher than the official estimates. Arnie Gundersen — a nuclear engineer and former nuclear industry executive turned whistle-blower — has done his own analysis, which he shared for the first time at a symposium in Harrisburg last week. VIDEO( http://www.tmia.com/march26 )

      http://globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=25757


      Report comment

      • lam335 lam335

        A Reevaluation of Cancer Incidence Near the Three Mile Island Nuclear Plant: The Collision of Evidence and Assumptions

        Steve Wing, David Richardson, Donna Armstrong, and Douglas Crawford-Brown
        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1469835/pdf/envhper00314-0052.pdf

        from abstract: “Results support the hypothesis that radiation doses are relatedto increased cancer incidence around TMI”

        from 1st page re original estimates of doses: “Radiation doses were calculated under an order from the court governing the TMI Public Health Fund This order prohibited “upper limit or worst case estimates of releases of radioactivity or population doses …[unless] such estimate would lead to a mathematical projection of less than 0.01 health effects”


        Report comment

      • VIDEO’s TMI & Health Effects Part 1: & Part 2:
        http://www.tmia.com/march26

        Dr. Steven Wing’s talk is about the long-term health effects to human, animal, and plant life in the aftermath of the accident at Three Mile Island. … Since 1988 he has collaborated on epidemiological studies of radiation exposures to workers at U.S. nuclear weapons plants.

        Arnie Gundersen was a senior executive in the nuclear industry with over twenty years experience.


        Report comment

    • Pallas89juno Pallas89juno

      Maybe already mentioned, but another factor involved in any type of problem in measuring occurrence rate shifts is the fact all our nuclear power reactors may be, as standard but 100% covert operating procedure, be releasing gigabequerels worth of radiation emitting radionuclides into the atmosphere every single time a containment unit cap is removed for routine maintenance, or installation, removal and replacement of fuel cores. I wonder, as well, whether or not the current creepy outraging (to me) news blackout on Fukushima emissions and dosimetry public health matters is because all our health, genetics, mental functioning have already been so badly comprimised by enormous periodic releases of radionuclides into the atmosphere for the previous decades. That the efficiency and apparent old-hat feel to the organization to not tell the public the truth about these matters is because the behavior by governments, nuclear plant operators, etc., is completely standard. If this is the case, that such releases of ionizing radioactive particles have been standard for decades, then it is long past time to overthrow the system, which is completely covert where it matters the most and causes the most damage. There is no working within this system either way. It does not function in terms of the public health, in terms of social justice, or at all in terms of ecological sustainability, and the latter is the very most important and first “law” if you will.


      Report comment

  • lam335 lam335

    re: “The sample was just above the lower limit of detection but was the first time strontium-90 had been detected in the edible portion of any of the fish samples.”
    < <<<<<<

    They should be obliged to tell us how many times strontium was detected in the “inedible” portions of the fish, and in what concentrations.


    Report comment

  • Bobby1

    Strontium is a bone seeker, it collects in bones. That’s where you would look for it, in fish bones. It collects in teeth, that’s why they had the children’s teeth study in the 60s.


    Report comment

  • dosdos dosdos

    Just a note for reference on the NRC site:

    A list of nuclear power plants in the US with links for basic information on each.
    http://www.nrc.gov/info-finder/reactor/index.html

    Current output status on each reactor (shows which are shut down).
    http://www.nrc.gov/info-finder/reactor/index.html


    Report comment

  • BreadAndButter BreadAndButter

    Concerning tritium in fish: a scientist told us lately during a public discussion that tritium accumulates in fish, so the fish is 8 times higher contaminated than water.

    That much for the “just above detection limits and therefore harmless” levels in water samples.


    Report comment

  • Presence of isotope in fish not evidence of presence of isotope.

    Wow …


    Report comment

  • shockwave shockwave

    All I can say is 3 words (while raising 5 fingers):

    BRAIN MAIMED!


    Report comment

  • stopnp stopnp

    This needs to be stopped


    Report comment

  • ExposeEvil OriginalSinRising

    This rapid trend of global radiological contamination from D.U. ammunition and distressed nuclear power reactors is simply tantamount to a silent nuclear holocaust.

    You will notice Japanese men and even women loosing a great deal of their genetic vibrance and luster; beyond hair loss and sickness this situation is similar to the total annhiliation of American culture and personal longevity which we have witnessed over the past century only on a much larger planetary scale in rapid timely succession.

    Eliminating Japan, a economic and cultural power house, icon of human achievement is a vital step in the globalist eugenics agenda to silence and destroy the human spirit.


    Report comment

    • James Tekton James Tekton

      Hello again OSR,

      Again well said but at this point, besides shining the light of the truth very brightly on all this horrendously ugly disastrous and catastrophic news, what can be done about the purposeful killing off of the human species by these psychopathic purveyors of deaths destruction for a few dollars more?

      It is an agenda as many of us have said all along. All one has to do is look into eugenics and population control. See the history of how this is done, mostly using war, but now also using the slow kill of radiation poisoning planet wide.

      Oh, the suffering that people do not know is around the corner is horrible unless it is preempted NOW. Pray, the people wake up and stop this monstrosity of evil before it stops us all….world-wide!


      Report comment

      • Pallas89juno Pallas89juno

        Dear James: The system of top-down minority control (by billionaires, not obviously by the oppressed) is not inevitable. The number of enemies in the status quo systems are relatively quite few (thousands) in actual physical numbers, our numbers–potentially about 7B. Their power is absolutely dependent upon the assent of 99.999% of that 7B! Alternatives to running things are not lacking or hard to make happen. Simply stop cooperating, for a start, with the 1% and stop worshipping them (though I suspect though the norm, this is not the case with you).


        Report comment

  • Auntie Nuke

    Numnutz! Totally numnutz!


    Report comment