Nuclear Information and Resource Service



 
Share |
Take Action!


Campaigns


Nuclear Monitor

 

Nuclear Crisis in Japan

Also follow us on:
dailykos NIRS blog    Youtube

 

twitter

Tell EPA: Radiation standards must be more protective

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is asking for comments on whether to update its regulation that allows the commercial nuclear power industry to expose people to radiation.

Every day, nuclear power reactors, and the many other facilities in the nuclear fuel chain, release invisible radioactivity into rivers, lakes, oceans, soil, ground water and the air. The EPA’s “Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Nuclear Power Operations” (40 CFR 190), established in 1977, set legal radiation levels for releases from nuclear facilities. At the time, the federal government was gung-ho on nuclear power and the EPA predicted there would be at least 300 reactors operating in the U.S. by the mid-1990s. Just four years earlier, President Nixon had predicted 1,000 U.S. reactors by 2000. The EPA’s rules were set to encourage that type of massive reactor construction in the U.S. Fortunately, both the EPA and Nixon were wrong. And some 30 years later, in 2006, the National Academy of Sciences reaffirmed that there is no safe level of radiation exposure (any exposure involves some risk; risk rises with amount of exposure).

One would think from that history that the EPA is proposing to strengthen its standards to be more protective. Although the EPA's proposal is vague, and it is in some ways asking whether it should change its standards at all, strengthening them does not appear to be on EPA’s agenda.

That’s why it’s important to raise our voices now—before the EPA jumps in the wrong direction.

Here’s one more reason to act now: the EPA typically sets “acceptable risk” standards for non-radioactive pollutants at anywhere from a 1 in 10,000 to a 1 in 1,000,000 range—meaning that one person in that larger amount could be expected to contract cancer from the effects of exposure to that “acceptable” amount. But according to the EPA’s own risk estimates, its standards for radiation exposure—25 millirems/year—equal a 1 in 500 “acceptable risk.” And that risk is even higher for women and children.

This is clearly unacceptable. Act now and tell the EPA that we demand more protection from radiation exposure, not less.


Notes: Everyone everywhere can participate in this action. For privacy reasons, we have blocked the sending of your street address and phone number for this action; they will not be provided to the EPA. Please use the icons above to share this action page via e-mail and on your social networks before sending in your comments. Please feel free to edit the suggested comments to reflect your own concerns; however, the subject line may not be edited (to ensure it is properly accepted as a comment by EPA).

For those who would like to delve deeper into this issue, you can find the EPA’s “Advanced Notice for Proposed Rulemaking as published in the Federal Register here. And you can find numerous other documents and discussion of the issue here.