Monitoring

READER'S VIEW: Towns need independent radiation monitors

By MARY LAMPERT, Duxbury

Regarding the article, ‘‘Bush manipulated post-Sept. 11 air reports, EPA says'' (Patriot Ledger Aug. 23/24). We learn that the airborne dust in New York City contained asbestos, lead, glass fibers and concrete. If I were a member of the cleanup crew or a resident, I would be mad as hell.

Why then should we trust the government Nuclear Regulatory Commission -when they, like the president post-Sept 11, assure us that there is no danger from Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station?

We shouldn't. For example, the NRC has in place a radiological monitoring program that tests for radiation in soil, plants and marine life. The sampling locations are divided into two classes, indicator and control. Indicator locations are those which are expected to show effects from Pilgrim's operations, while the control stations are supposed to be located outside the influence of Pilgrim Station.

However, many of the control stations are located precisely where you would expect an impact, inside the emergency planning zone communities, within eyesight of the reactor - Jones River, Powder Point, Duxbury Bay and Duxbury Beach. Hence, the Plutonium 239/240 levels on Duxbury Beach were not attributed to releases at Pilgrim because they were found at so-called ‘‘control stations.''

The solution is to lobby the Legislature to assess the industry to pay for independent monitoring systems located in each of the neighboring towns - only then will we really know what is blowing in the wind.