You must comment by August 3, 2014
Here is a link to the overall proposal http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0689-0001
Here is a link for an anonymous comment http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0689-0051
My comment is quick, but pointed (hopefully!):
The EPA needs to adopt the precautionary approach. Any
increase in exposure to radiation increases risks for a range of diseases and
congenital conditions. Therefore, the EPA should reduce allowable exposure
levels, rather than increase allowable exposure. The precautionary approach is
based in the SCIENCE.
Radiation is now known to have bystander and delayed
effects capable of producing genomic instability. These findings have been
replicated scientifically. Internally ingested or inhaled radionuclides pose
special and enduring risks for exposed individuals. Most radionuclides –
including uranium – are chemically as well as radiologically genotoxic.
Research on Navajo children’s exposure to uncapped uranium mines in Arizona
documents the terrible effects of internal emitters.
The science is
extraordinarily clear that raising acceptable exposure levels will measurably
and significantly increase adverse human health effects. The EPA has the
mission to protect human health. Raising allowable exposure levels is not
simply bad for human health, it is incommensurable with the EPA’s mission.
LOWER ALLOWBLE EXPOSURE LEVELS. DO NOT RAISE THEM.
Majia Holmer Nadesan
Receipt: Your Comment Tracking Number: 1jy-8d5s-yqin
Personal dosimetry monitoring that is easy to use. Our x-ray badges help employers maintain compliance with state and federal regulatory standards. medical devices
ReplyDelete