As one activist quipped, “The ostrich sticks its head in the sand.” The NRC has cancelled a radiation safety study in the US. It says it would cost too much to study health impacts of nuclear sites on host communities. What is the NRC afraid of? Confirmation of European studies which found significant impacts? Who will pay when the NRC protects owners’ profits, not the public? We will – through our health care insurance, and loss of our loved ones. http://www.beyondnuclear.org/home/2015/9/8/vital-cancer-study-canceled-nrc-will-hide-the-truth-about-nu.html by Paul Gunter
As if that was not enough, the NRC may change its public health radiation standards from the proven no safe dose (LTN) to the favorite theory of the pro-nuclear industry, hormesis: “a little radiation is good for you.” Read this piece by Karl Gros2sman in the Ecologist which sums up reactions from anti-nuclear groups.
Meanwhile, VT Rep. Peter Welch questioned the NRC Commissioners on two issues: public participation in the decommissioning process, and the decommissioning fund. He said, “There is an inherent conflict between … Entergy, which wants to put as many costs on [the fund] as possible, and the community which wants strict limitations…” Welch said Entergy is seeking to have attorney fees and membership dues in NEI, the industry trade group, paid out of the fund. He said we want a “seat at the table” and “strict monitoring of the decomm fund itself.” Finally, regarding SAFSTOR, he said “site restoration is going to be postponed literally for generations, and there is a really big question as to whether or not we should try to proceed with decomm sooner rather than later, in 5 years rather than 50 years.” Read more and watch the video on www.vtdigger.org/