Weakening the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) radiation protection standard is not supported by current research and could harm people, especially women and children, a former Department of Energy official wrote in a Jan. 23 article.
Former DOE assistant secretary of Nuclear Energy Kathryn Huff published an opinion piece in Scientific American cautioning against the idea of weakening the linear no-threshold (LNT) model, as proposed in President Donald Trump’s May 23 NRC executive order.
The White House ordered a review of LNT and another radiation standard in the order.
LNT is a safety standard that assumes any dose of ionizing radiation, no matter how low the dosage is, increases cancer risk proportionally. Trump’s executive order directed the NRC to reconsider LNT and another key standard, saying the “models are flawed.”
In her opinion piece, Huff questioned the directive and criticized the notion of dropping the LNT model. It is not apparent how lowering or removing the risk model would increase the production of nuclear power, Huff said.
Until new research comes, Huff said NRC should not consider moving on from the risk model.
“As a nuclear energy advocate and former Department of Energy official, I want to see more nuclear energy on the grid soon. But loosening the protections of the linear no-threshold (LNT) model is not supported by current research,” Huff said.
“We must urge the NRC’s current commissioners to demand evidence and heed science over political agenda,” Huff said.
In 2021, NRC rejected a 2015 petition from three medical providers who tried to convince NRC to lower the LNT standard and remove the As Low As Is Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) standard from its regulations.
“Given the current state of scientific knowledge, the NRC has determined that the LNT model continues to be an appropriate basis for its radiation protection regulatory framework,” NRC said in the 2021 Federal Register notice. “Thus, the NRC’s current radiation protection regulations provide for the adequate protection of human health and safety, and as such, changes to 10 CFR part 20 are not warranted at this time.”
Huff said the agency’s newest commissioners, Ho Nieh and Doug Weaver, made commitments to safety and risk-informed decision-making. If the two commissioners move forward with changes to the LNT model, then they would break their promises “and undermine public support for new nuclear reactors,” the former DOE official said.
With NRC new regulations from its wholesale revision set to be released next month, Huff said the agency should continue to use the LNT model for now.
“Between 2015 and 2021, when the NRC methodically re-assessed and reconfirmed the LNT model, the process was public, evidence-based and rooted in international consensus,” Huff said.
“We should reject changes to the current risk model until we have new data,” Huff added. “We should fund the many researchers who are willing to do this work, and we should take into account what international research says. Moreover, the notion the public will meekly accept weaker radiation standards without explanation seems foolhardy.”