[ RadSafe ] Re:Reasonable risk?

[John Jacobus]

Jerry,
EPA regulatons are based on a number of assumptions
and statistics.    The "driver" is that the allowed
cancer risks for radiation exposures can only be a
tiny fracton of the normal incidence rate.  I assume
that you know this already. I suggest that it you are
that concerned to write your Congressional
representatives and demand an investigation.
Complaining on this list-server will not change
anything.  I assume you also know this.

As for the cost to reduce exposures, I probably would
go with the NRC's assessment of $2,000 per man-rem. 
There analysis is in NUREG 1530, "Reassessment of the
NRC's Dollar Per Person-Rem Conversion Factor Policy."
 You can get a copy by sending an e-mail request to
distribution at nrc.gov

--- jjcohen at prodigy.net wrote:

> John,
>     By golly--your numbers look quite reasonable to
> me. Now, if we could
> omly convince the EPA, who seem to be concerned with
> doses in excess or 4.0
> mrem/a.
> BTW, what do you think is a reasonable cost to avoid
> 1.0 person-rem---- pick
> the closest: $1.0, 10.0, 100, 1000, 10,000, 100,000,
> or 1 million???
> Jerry
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "John Jacobus" <crispy_bird at yahoo.com>
> To: <jjcohen at prodigy.net>; <radsafe at radlab.nl>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 2:24 PM
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Re:Reasonable risk?
> 
> 
> > Jerry,
> > Yes, 1 mSv/yr (100 mrem/yr).
> >
> > For occupational workers, I would also say that 5
> > mSv/yr (500 mrem/yr) as there is no requirement
> for
> > monitoring, so therefore the risks must be
> minimal.
> > For monitored doses between 500 and mSv (5,000 and
> 500
> > mrem) one would monitor exposure results to
> determine
> > if any changes in personnel exposures have
> changed.
> > However, changes in shielding or work practices
> would
> > have to be based on reasonable costs.
> >
> > If anyone besides Jerry Cohen, who does not work
> in
> > the field of health physics, has any comments, I
> would
> > be interested in their perspectives.
> >
> > --- Jerry Cohen <jjcohen at prodigy.net> wrote:
> >

+++++++++++++++++++
"A scientist's aim in a discussion with his colleagues is not to persuade, but to clarify." 
Leo Szilard
-- John
John Jacobus, MS
Certified Health Physicist
e-mail:  crispy_bird at yahoo.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com