ANS is committed to advancing, fostering, and promoting the development and application of nuclear sciences and technologies to benefit society.
Explore the many uses for nuclear science and its impact on energy, the environment, healthcare, food, and more.
Explore membership for yourself or for your organization.
Conference Spotlight
2026 ANS Annual Conference
May 31–June 3, 2026
Denver, CO|Sheraton Denver
Latest Magazine Issues
Jan 2026
Jul 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
February 2026
Nuclear Technology
January 2026
Fusion Science and Technology
November 2025
Latest News
Katy Huff on the impact of loosening radiation regulations
Katy Huff, former assistant secretary of nuclear energy at the Department of Energy, recently wrote an op-ed that was published in Scientific American.
In the piece, Huff, who is an ANS member and an associate professor in the Department of Nuclear, Plasma, and Radiological Engineering at the University of Illinois–Urbana-Champaign, argues that weakening Nuclear Regulatory Commission radiation regulations without new research-based evidence will fail to speed up nuclear energy development and could have negative consequences.
Tae Young Kong, Gamal Akabani, John W. Poston, Sr.
Nuclear Technology | Volume 205 | Number 6 | June 2019 | Pages 781-789
Technical Paper | doi.org/10.1080/00295450.2018.1546536
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
The 2007 Recommendation of the International Commission on Radiological Protection [ICRP Publication 103, Elsevier (2007)] requires implementation of the concept of a dose constraint for members of the public living around nuclear facilities. Under the paradigm of regulatory science, the use of dose constraints is still highly debatable. This study determines whether a dose constraint is necessary for members of the public living near U.S. nuclear power plants (NPPs) using data from the years 2007 to 2009, which were provided by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. As a result of analysis of exposure data, it is concluded that a dose constraint is not necessary for members of the public living around U.S. NPPs and that such a constraint may place an unnecessary regulatory burden on the licensees.