Abstract
Nuclear regulations are a subset of social regulations (laws to control activities that may negatively impact the environment, health, and safety) that concern control of ionizing radiation from radiation-producing equipment and from radioactive materials. The impressive safety record among nuclear technologies is due, in no small part, to the work of radiation safety professionals and to a protection system that has kept pace with the rapid technologic advancements in electric power generation, engineering, and medicine. The price of success, however, has led to a regulatory organization and philosophy characterized by complexity, confusion, public fear, and increasing economic costs. Over the past 20 years, regulatory costs in the nuclear sector have increased more than 250% in constant 1995 U.S. dollars. Costs of regulatory compliance can be reduced sharply, particularly when health and environmental benefits of risk reduction are questionable. Three key regulatory areas should be closely examined and modified to improve regulatory effectiveness and efficiency: a) radiation protection should be changed from a risk-based to dose-based system; b) the U.S. government should adopt the modern metric system (International System of Units), and radiation quantities and units should be simplified to facilitate international communication and public understanding; and c) a single, independent office is needed to coordinate nuclear regulations established by U.S. federal agencies and departments.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (950.8 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Adler H. I., Weinberg A. M. An approach to setting radiation standards. Health Phys. 1978 Jun;34(6):719–720. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Clarke R. Control of low-level radiation exposure: time for a change? J Radiol Prot. 1999 Jun;19(2):107–115. doi: 10.1088/0952-4746/19/2/301. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ghiassi-nejad M., Mortazavi S. M. J., Cameron J. R., Niroomand-rad A., Karam P. A. Very high background radiation areas of Ramsar, Iran: preliminary biological studies. Health Phys. 2002 Jan;82(1):87–93. doi: 10.1097/00004032-200201000-00011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mossman K. L. The linear no-threshold debate: where do we go from here? Med Phys. 1998 Mar;25(3):279–300. doi: 10.1118/1.598208. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Strom Daniel J., Watson Charles R. On being understood: clarity and jargon in radiation protection. Health Phys. 2002 Mar;82(3):373–386. doi: 10.1097/00004032-200203000-00010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Tengs T. O., Adams M. E., Pliskin J. S., Safran D. G., Siegel J. E., Weinstein M. C., Graham J. D. Five-hundred life-saving interventions and their cost-effectiveness. Risk Anal. 1995 Jun;15(3):369–390. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1995.tb00330.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Trichopoulos D., Zavitsanos X., Koutis C., Drogari P., Proukakis C., Petridou E. The victims of chernobyl in Greece: induced abortions after the accident. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1987 Oct 31;295(6606):1100–1100. doi: 10.1136/bmj.295.6606.1100. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]