Re: Senate Bill 1043

[BLHamrick@AOL.COM]

In a message dated 7/11/2003 6:51:41 AM Pacific Standard Time, 

Clayton.Bradt@LABOR.STATE.NY.US writes:



> I have had this conversation before with

> Barbara and others in the state radiation control community, and it seems I

> am in the minority on this issue (as on most others).  I think that

> expanding the reach of the Atomic Energy Act (AEA) to include other (all?)

> sources of radiation is a terrible idea - for constitutional reasons.



Yes, Clayton and I have discussed this.  My view is that there are so many 

trans-boundary issues (i.e., the manufacture of sources distributed nationwide 

and internationally, the waste disposal issues, the political issue of who has 

the "most protective" standards, and others), and issues related to who has 

the "critical mass" necessary to support the super-structure and expend 

sufficient funds to fully develop well-researched guidance, contract for the 

development of support software (such as RESRAD and the D and D code), or research 

emerging issues, etc. that it seems more expedient and efficient to have a single 

federal authority on the issue.  I agree there is potentially a valid 

constitutional challenge to my view.



Barbara