I was a 16 and got the RRP.  Of course I was only 46, but I think RRP is a
very good decision for your father.

Not that it makes much difference, but a prostate cancer found through
PSA testing with negative DRE results is usually classified as T1c.

As you say, the PSA is marginal with respect to the Partin tables, but
remember the 10 ng/ml dividing point is somewhat arbitrary.   In
reality, the lower the PSA the more likely it is that the cancer is
confined to the prostate, but nothing radical happens as you pass 10.
The best you can determine from the Partin tables is that with Gleason
6, the chances of the cancer being organ confined is between 62 and 75
percent.  But remember even that is a rough estimate subject to error.
In any event, even if it isn't organ confined, there is a good chance a
surgeon will get it all, the chances for a cure in such a case are
excellent.

He might also look into the possibility of external radiation.   I was
67 when I was diagnosed with Gleason 7=3+4, PSA 4.5, T1c.   My doctor
suggested either radical prostatectomy or external radiation.   I chose
the former, but in retrospect it was a close call.   As you approach 70
or older, the likelihood of not being permanently impotent following a
RP goes up significantly, even if your surgeon is first rate at nerves
sparing surgery.  The impotence figures for older men are better with
radiation. Also, you need not worry so much about what may happen 15 or
20 years hence.   I recovered erections after about 18 months, but had I
been five years older I would have chosen radiation.   (Note that no one
knows at present the very long term success rates for the modern methods
of radiation therapy because they haven't been in use long enough, but
there is a reasonable chance that radiation will prove just as effective
as surgery.  For up to ten years, it is already known that such is the
case.)

As I think I've noted, it is a borderline age with respect to choosing
between radiation and surgery.  One important factor is the skill of the
surgeon, which is very crucial.   One thing that influences many men is
the fact that after surgery, the post-surgical pathology report may give
you a better idea of just how extensive the cancer was.   If, as is
usually the case for a cancer like your father's, the report is
encouraging, that can help alleviate some of the anxiety about
recurrence.   Also, some of us don't like the idea of killing of the
cancer in degrees over a couple of years instead of getting rid of it in
one procedure.

Patrick Walsh's Guide to Surviving Prostate Cancer is a good initial
guide to these matters.

Leonards reply is very informative, right on the nose. I was 69 with PSA
7.2 -->7,9 in one month, Gleason 6
corrected to 5 after surgery. I was not eligible for radiation due to
radiation of the groin for a
previous cancer. Have anyone looked at seed implants. A number of fellows in
our US TOO! group
have had them and are quite satisfied. Of course Urologists are surgeons and
will almost always
recommend surgery and a radiation oncologist will want to do external beam
or seed implants.
Tom