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.
Here’s the basic difference between the two models: the LNT model, endorsed by the National Academies of Sciences and used by 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 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.
Tell the NRC below to reject the hormesis model and instead to strengthen radiation standards.
Notes: everyone can participate in this action. We encourage you to edit the sample comments to use your own language and reflect your own concerns. Please share this action page with your friends and colleagues by using the icons on the top right, but please do so before sending your comments. The comment deadline
is September 8, 2015, has been extended until November 19, 2015–more time to share widely! Thank you.