Act now: tell the NRC it must reject efforts by nuclear fanatics to weaken radiation standards!

Nuclear Informationa and Resource Service, 19 Aug 15, In February, a group of pro-nuclear fanatics—there is really no other way to describe them—submitted three petitions for rulemaking to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).

These three petitions would turn the entire basis for radiation protection standards on its head: they argue that the “Linear No-Threshold” (LNT) radiation model used by the NRC, EPA, and most modern societies should be replaced by a “hormesis” model.

But this is no academic debate about obscure terminology. This is a direct assault on the NRC’s fundamental regulations and on the scientific community itself. If adopted, the hormesis model would mean, in the real world, more death and disease from even the normal operations of nuclear power facilities.

Tell the NRC to reject the hormesis model and instead to strengthen radiation standards.

Here’s the basic difference between the two models: the LNT model, used by the National Academies of Sciences and all government agencies, acknowledges that there is no such thing as a “safe” level of radiation exposure. All exposure carries some risk of cancer or other disease, and that risk rises with the amount of exposure. The “hormesis” model, on the other hand, asserts—with little to no scientific backing—that exposure to very low levels of radiation can actually be beneficial to people, and that there is no concern about exposures until they reach very high levels.

If implemented, the hormesis model would result in needless death and misery. The concept of ALARA (a requirement that nuclear operators reduce exposures “as low as reasonably achievable”) would be tossed out the window. Emergency Planning Zones would be significantly reduced or abolished entirely. Instead of being forced to spend money to limit radiation releases, nuclear utilities could pocket greater profits.

In addition, adoption of the hormesis model by the NRC would throw the entire government’s radiation protection rules into disarray, since other agencies, like the EPA, also rely on the LNT model.

The entire concept is unconscionable and the NRC knows it. It never should have accepted these petitions for comment; the agency should have just thrown them in the trash heap where they came from.

Tell the NRC now to reject the hormesis model and instead to strengthen radiation standards.

The sponsors of these petitions are the radiological equivalent of climate deniers–they either refuse to believe the scientific evidence, or deliberately ignore it to promote the interests of an industry. I wrote about this phenomonen last week on GreenWorld. And, like the climate deniers, the radiation deniers must be defeated: for the sake of our health and our lives, our homes, our children and generations to come, our planet.

The sample comments provided include a couple of quotes, one from the chair of the NAS’ BEIR VII committee, which endorsed the LNT approach and one from the former head of the EPA’s radiation section, which states that the EPA isn’t planning to change its rules anytime soon. As always, you are free to edit the sample comments to use your own language and address your own concerns.

If anything, as we’ve stated in previous alerts on other radiation issues, the NRC’s radiation standards need to be strengthened. As we’ve learned in recent years, women and children, especially girls, are more susceptible to radiation than men. Yet the standards don’t reflect that. Indeed, the NRC’s rules still rely on the “standard man” approach, which allows greater exposures to the most vulnerable in our population.

The NRC needs to hear from all of us now that we simply will not accept the efforts of a few pro-nuclear fanatics to benefit the nuclear power industry at the expense of public health and safety. So please spread this message widely. You can find and share this Alert from this page. You can share theAction Page using the icons on its top right–but please do so before you send in your comments.

Finally, a gentle reminder that NIRS campaigns–like our ongoing efforts to expose the real effects of radiation and prevent any weakening of radiation protection standards–cost money. We rely on our supporters–you–to help pay for these campaigns. Please consider donating here now or after you send in your comments, or by PayPal here, or by check to NIRS, 6930 Carroll Avenue, #340, Takoma Park, MD 20912. You can also call in a donation to NIRS at 301-270-6477. Ask for Denise Jakobsberg.

Michael Mariotte
President
Nuclear Information and Resource Service
nirsnet@nirs.org

please don’t forget to sign and share our Don’t Nuke the Climate statement. Thousands already have, we hope many thousands more will do so before December.

Stay Informed:

NIRS on the web: http://www.nirs.org

GreenWorld: (NIRS’ daily blog chronicling nuclear issues and the transition to a nuclear-free, carbon-free energy system)http://www.safeenergy.org

NIRS on Facebook:

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Nuclear-Information-and-Resource-Service/26490791479?sk=wall&filter=12

http://www.facebook.com/nonukesnirs

http://www.facebook.com/groups/nukefreeclimatefreemarch/

NIRS on Twitter: http://twitter.com/#!/nirsnet

NIRS on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/nirsnet