Re: 15 or 25 mrem per year?

[Steven Dapra <sjd@swcp.com>]

Feb. 12



	JJ Cohen wrote:  " . . . perhaps someone can explain how such

regulations, that are clearly not in the best public interest, evolve into

public policy. Is something wrong with the system?"



	To keep this at a manageable level, first there is something wrong with

the regulators.  They are drunk with their own power, and without something

to regulate they are out of a job and out of power.  Hence the obsession

with regulating more and more to lower and lower levels.  Second, there is

something wrong with Congress:  it is made up of cowards who refuse to rein

in the regulators, in particular the EPA.  I single out the EPA because it

is by far the worst of the regulatory agencies.



	Later, Barbara Hamrick introduced LNT and "no safe level of exposure" and

wrote:  "Even the EPA has fallen prey to this mythology, though I'm

guessing that's more a reflection on the large number of non-science policy

wonks they hire than the quality of the relatively few hard scientists that

work for them".



	Pardon me, Barbara.  The EPA has not "fallen prey" to anything but its

lust for power.  If LNT and 'no safe level' will increase its power, EPA is

all for it.  It has nothing to do with "non-science policy wonks" it has to

do with a <philosophy> of regulating everything in sight.



Steven Dapra

sjd@swcp.com





************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To

unsubscribe, send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the

text "unsubscribe radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail,

with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe archives at

http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/