Common Dreams NewsCenter
National Conference for Media Reform
 
     
Home | Newswire | Contacting Us | About Us | Donate | Sign-Up | Archives
   
 
     
 

Discuss this story Discuss this story Print This Post Print This Post E-Mail This Article
 
 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Takes 32 Years to Answer Petition

by Dave Gram

MONTPELIER, Vt. - The nuclear energy watchdog group New England Coalition has been waiting a long time, a very long time, for the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission to pay attention to its concerns.

The agency has just replied to a petition concerning safety and radiation exposure that the coalition filed in 1975.

“No petition before its time,” said NRC spokesman Eliot Brenner.

As if being ignored for three decades weren’t enough, the NRC denied the group’s petition.

The coalition had been urging federal regulators to consider, as part of their environmental review of the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant, the full effects of nuclear power - from mining uranium to burying radioactive waste. The plant opened in 1972.

After two federal court decisions favoring critics of nuclear power, the NRC developed a table detailing its estimates for radiation exposures from various parts of the nuclear “fuel cycle,” including mining and processing uranium fuel.

The coalition filed its petition Nov. 19, 1975, saying the commission’s table “’seriously underestimates’ the impact on human safety and health” by disregarding the long-term effects of certain long-lasting radioactive materials, especially radon, an NRC document said.

NRC spokesman Neal Sheehan said his agency had addressed the issues raised in the petition in other contexts, including a generic environmental review of nuclear power plants. But it wasn’t until the agency began reviewing a batch of applications for new reactors in the last two years that it began to address the coalition’s concern head-on.

Sheehan said the NRC formally denied the petition March 11 because the agency did not see a “high safety significance” in connection with radon.

Raymond Shadis, technical adviser with the coalition, said knowledge about radon has grown in recent decades and there is more reason to worry about it now than was known in 1975. The Environmental Protection Agency said in 2003 that radon from natural sources can accumulate in buildings and is responsible for an estimated 21,000 deaths from lung cancer in the United States each year.

“At least the NRC is, if not prompt, consistent,” Shadis said. “They got it wrong the first time and after 32 years of sleeping on it, they got it wrong again.”

Sheehan and Brenner said the NRC shelved the petition while it responded to what it considered more pressing matters.

Shadis argued that the First Amendment’s right of the people to “petition the government for a redress of grievances” isn’t worth much if the government doesn’t respond.

“It’s supposed to be sometime soon, not 32 years down the road,” he said.

On the Net:

Coalition: http://www.newenglandcoalition.org/

© 2008 The Associated Press.

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • NewsVine
  • StumbleUpon
  • YahooMyWeb
  • Technorati
 

3 Comments so far

  1. namaste April 2nd, 2008 2:16 pm

    just about 1 trillion seconds later … (32 yr)

  2. gde April 2nd, 2008 6:57 pm

    A substance that kills 21K a year in a very painful and expensive manner is not of “high safety significance” if it is release by a nuclear power plant.

    Say what?

  3. zephyrndinburg April 3rd, 2008 2:44 am

    only 672,000 deaths later!

    heck of a job nrcyuhh

    ergh.

Join the discussion:

You must be logged in to post a comment. If you haven't registered yet, click here to register. (It's quick, easy and free. And we won't give your email address to anyone.)

 
   FAIR USE NOTICE  
  This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
 
 
 
Common Dreams NewsCenter
A non-profit news service providing breaking news & views for the progressive community.
Home | Newswire | Contacting Us | About Us | Donate | Sign-Up | Archives

© Copyrighted 1997-2008
www.commondreams.org