[ RadSafe ] Re: Radiation Hormesis
bobcherry at satx.rr.com
Fri Dec 28 20:29:33 CST 2007
>>How many layers of administrative law rulings must one slog through before
getting into the Federal courts?
One can appeal an NRC administrative law decision to the NRC Commissioners.
The next level of appeal is the Federal courts. That is one layer of appeal
"slogging." I presume it is similar for other Federal agencies.
>>How expensive and time consuming is this?
Not cheap and not quick.
I grew up in Detroit three miles downwind of Henry Ford's Rouge Plant and
not far from U.S. Steel blast furnaces and a Marathon Oil refinery. While
the EPA has shortcomings, as do we all, the air is cleaner in my old
neighborhood now than when it was when I was a boy. Part of this is due to
the reduced steel production in the area, but EPA has the most to do with
it. The Detroit River, the Rouge River, and Lake Erie are in much better
shape than they were in 1970, primarily due to EPA's regulations.
Anybody here from Pittsburgh or Cleveland with similar stories?
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On Behalf
Of Steven Dapra
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2007 6:06 PM
To: radsafe at radlab.nl
Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] Re: Radiation Hormesis
Speaking only for myself, I do not like administrative law. Yes I
know, a certain amount is necessary, however we have vastly too much of it.
If one takes the limited government position, as I do, the EPA should not
exist. Furthermore, even if I accepted its existence, this agency has far
too much power. No government agency or department should have so much
Our system is cumbersome, and it is cumbersome because it is so
large. Whether or not it works well depends on one's definition of "well."
To use an extreme example, Joseph Stalin's ideas about working well are a
goodly distance from my ideas --- and the ideas of (I am
certain) all RADSAFErs. To bring it up to date, the Bush/Cheney definition
of what works well for guarding the nation's security . . . okay, point
As far as appealing administraative law rulings into the Federal
courts is concerned, I am incredulous that Bob Cherry would say such a
thing. How many layers of administrative law rulings must one slog through
before getting into the Federal courts? How expensive and time consuming is
this? Remember that in addition to fighting the battle with the regulatory
agencies the appellant must also continue to run his business. This can
become very time-consuming. Besides, by the time the appellant gets into
the Federal courts, since he has already lost his administrative appeals he
arrives in Federal court with an automatic prejudice against his position.
Plus, he is fighting the limitless wealth and power of the Federal
government. Sure, companies fight these battles and sometimes they even
win. Even if the accused wins he is forced to bear an enormous financial
and emotional burden. I would endorse what Syd says about "deference."
Syd also said, "Pity is not what EPA deserves, I fear." What the
EPA deserves is its abolition. What it engenders is at best apprehension,
and probably (more often) fear.
At 01:44 PM 12/28/07 -0600, Bob Cherry wrote:
>It appears that Mr. Levine does not like our Federal system of
>administrative laws that regulatory agencies write in compliance with
>Congressional statutory law. I wonder if he would prefer that Congress
>write the administrative laws, too.
>Our system is cumbersome but I think it works well. I probably don't
>have the quote quite right, but it goes something like this: "Our
>system of government is the worst system, except for all the others."
>By the way, litigants can always appeal administrative law rulings into
>the "real" Federal court system if they wish. The alleged deference in
>that system may be in the eye of the beholder.
>From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On
>Behalf Of Syd H. Levine
>Sent: Friday, December 28, 2007 1:20 PM
>To: John Jacobus; Brennan, Mike (DOH); radsafe at radlab.nl
>Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Re: Radiation Hormesis
>But EPA DOES write law. They do it every day! The legislators have
>delegated the vast majority of regulatory duties to administrative
>agencies like EPA. Historically, this goes back to the original
>railroad regulatory scheme in the very late 1800s, but has become a
>true monster since 1970 when Nixon gave us the EPA.
>Congress merely says regulate some particular activity, and EPA is
>charged with developing the administrative law to accomplish same.
>Worse yet, if the agency decides you have violated some provision of
>this voluminous administrative law, you get the dubious honor of having
>the matter adjudicated before an "administrative law judge", generally
>an employee of the agency that promulgated the regulation to begin
>with. If you ever do get to see a "real" judge, deference will be
>given to the agency ( a nice way of saying what you say will not matter).
>Pity is not what EPA deserves, I fear.
>Syd H. Levine
>AnaLog Services, Inc.
>Phone: (270) 276-5671
>Telefax: (270) 276-5588
>E-mail: analog at logwell.com
>Web URL: www.logwell.com
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
More information about the RadSafe