tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3033288879708780106.post939280956718389923..comments2023-04-07T05:19:44.951-04:00Comments on Yes Vermont Yankee: The Problems with "Reasonable" Regulation: Guest post by Chris StaubusMeredith Angwinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02737538041807740424noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3033288879708780106.post-36442425222181322582014-07-09T12:21:28.945-04:002014-07-09T12:21:28.945-04:00I'm game for that! If a minnow can stop indust...I'm game for that! If a minnow can stop industry or development of any kind, why not a radio health hazard legal case here to shut down NYC? People seriously sue for all kinds of ridiculous exaggerated reasons to protect the environment like tritium in VY's ground water or digging up the plant's deep foundations?Mitchhttp://atomicinsights.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3033288879708780106.post-81276034565345641402014-07-09T08:25:52.071-04:002014-07-09T08:25:52.071-04:00Well, actually, I used that as an example when I w...Well, actually, I used that as an example when I was testifying for our legislators about the proposed BRC rules. Our Statehouse is also made of granite so the background radiation inside is anywhere from two to three times higher than outside. I showed this with a micro-rem meter I brought. Also handed out Radioactive Materials stickers for the legislators to stick on their foreheads because of the 14C they carried around in their living tissues. We also had some bricks, bananas, and a container of salt substitute (KI) to show them that these were the kinds of things they'd be regulating in they passed the legislation they were considering to counteract the NRC's BRC rules. Their whole argument was, "we have to DO something to cover the gap" they thought the NRC was opening by allowing BRC to be used. Well, there was no "gap. It was all hype and FUD.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3033288879708780106.post-85143558914430237812014-07-08T23:43:13.591-04:002014-07-08T23:43:13.591-04:00Not being whimsical here but maybe a seed for a si...Not being whimsical here but maybe a seed for a sincere test trial to show up insanity of radiophobia and rad limits. Can one make a case by applying NRC and EPA rules to shut down Grand Central Station and the Empire State Building lobby and half of downtown Manhattan buildings "for the public safety" based on particle emissions of granite and other stones they're made of? If a desert insect can summon a legion of Green lawyers, why not flag some open minded law school eagles looking for a way to make their name to try this?<br /><br />James Greenidge<br />Queens NY<br />jimwghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06964988758509076556noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3033288879708780106.post-68050570918085699502014-07-08T18:52:16.606-04:002014-07-08T18:52:16.606-04:00Below Regulatory Concern was an attempt to establi...Below Regulatory Concern was an attempt to establish a process by which a holder of a byproduct materials license could dispose of materials in a manner not requiring licensed disposal facilities, if they could show, by (conservative) analysis, that disposal in normal landfills or other means would not cause demonstrable harm to a member of the public. The idea was that if you had quantities in the range of, say, single atoms of byproduct material in say, a cubic gigaparsec of volume, you likely could throw those in the trash and not have any harm come of it. Of course, legislators and activist groups screamed bloody murder from the rooftops over it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3033288879708780106.post-86044656349329678382014-07-08T15:53:22.024-04:002014-07-08T15:53:22.024-04:00What is "the BRC concept?"What is "the BRC concept?"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3033288879708780106.post-37078902434884447782014-07-08T10:07:45.903-04:002014-07-08T10:07:45.903-04:00One problem I have noticed with the current regula...One problem I have noticed with the current regulatory paradigm (in the nuclear business anyway) is that it is almost always a ratchet, and once the regulations on anything are tightened, you almost never see them loosened again, even if there is the science to justify doing so. A good example would be the ill-fated attempt to implement the BRC concept. I was involved with that in my state and their was a proverbial firestorm of outrage among legislators and activist groups. As soon as anyone perceives that you are loosening the regulatory bonds, they trot out the old emotional arguments ("you're advocating a less-safe process", or "don't do it, our children's safety is at stake"), and those generally trump any scientific arguments.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com