USA protects the nuclear industry with new Protection Action Guidelines PAGs)

New Protection Action Guidelines Will Leave You Chilled to the Bone, Nuclear World,  26 Dec 15, “………..On April 15th, 2013 a request for public comment regarding the new Protective Action Guidelines or PAGs was published in the Federal Register while at the same time, the EPA made the new PAGs effective immediately. Obviously, the request for public comment was just a dog and pony show designed to give the illusion of presenting the new PAGs in a public forum.

The new PAGs released under the Obama administration puts our health at risk due to its utter lack of concern regarding skyrocketing cancer rates, genetic mutations, miscarriages, infertility and other radiation induced health issues that will manifest as a direct result of these new PAGs. (Ironically, the majority of these health issues can easily be blamed on the victim’s poor eating habits, radiophobia, “genetic predisposition” and a host of other things, but it’s doubtful the word “nuclear radiation” will never be uttered.)

The vague and misleading language deliberately engineered to leave you vulnerable and unprotected will also leave you chilled to the bone once you comprehend the full impact of just how inept the new PAGs are. The root problem lies in the unconcealed fact that these new PAGs “allow massive radiation exposures without any protective actions being recommended to limit them.”

To add insult to injury, the new PAGs bury the new changes in footnotes. These changes are not included in the document itself, only citations referencing other reports. Not one word is mentioned as to how the new PAGs compare to previously established protections in the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA).

According to the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), the new Protective Action Guides would disturbingly raise allowed levels of radiation in food, water, air, and the environment. PEER is a national organization of local, state, and federal employees who were justifiably alarmed over internal EPA emails regarding new PAG standards. PEER claims these new PAGs will cause a “nearly 1000-fold increase for exposure to strontium-90, a 3000 to 100,000-fold hike for exposure to iodine-131; and an almost 25,000 rise for exposure to radioactive nickel-63″ in drinking water.

The EPA is turning its back on its responsibility, as previous limitations assured that we would not be exposed to “more than 5 rem over 50 years.”

These new PAGs may be the final nail in the coffin if they are not immediately repealed and the older, more responsible PAGs are reestablished.

Suspiciously, since 2011 (coincidentally the same year Fukushima started spewing its unrelenting radioactive poison all over the world) the EPA has been planning on raising limits. These planning sessions took place behind closed doors due to a loophole, since PAGs are considered “guidance” and therefore do not require public input as proposed new regulations would. However, the problem arises as these new “permissible levels” are treated as if they carry the same weight as a regulation would. It’s scary business indeed, as internal documents obtained by PEER under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) show evidence that the new “permissible levels” would allow a single glass of drinking water to contain, “the equivalent of a lifetime’s permissible exposure.”

These new PAGs are hard to swallow, as they grant “on-site authorities” a great degree of latitude in ignoring previously established limits. They also leave the EPA unaccountable. What is most concerning, is that the term “on-site authorities” is very vague and misleading. I believe it is our duty to question who qualifies as an “on-site authority.” The first thing that pops into my mind is some corporate flunky with a clip board and a checklist or a lab coat clad EPA employee well versed in all the loopholes contained within the new PAGs. Anyway you slice it, these new PAGs spell disaster for the US population as a whole. http://www.nuclearworld.net/pag/

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: