[ RadSafe ] NRC Press Release and suggested PAGs

John Ahlquist john.ahlquist at sbcglobal.net
Wed Mar 16 19:34:00 CDT 2011

As others have stated it would be nice to know the assumptions behind these 
calculations.  I'm surprised that the NRC did not include them or at least have 
a reference to them.  We know nothing about the source term, the plume height, 
the age of the fuel, the type of fuel [MOX?], time of release post shut down, 
etc.  Otherwise, I don't know what to make of these numbers.   Should I use them 
for decision making or not?  We need to understand the numbers to make good 
decisions.  The Japanese people have been traumatized a lot. We don't need to 
throw more confusion into this serious situation.

I would encourage anyone from NRC who reads this list to provide some more 

John Ahlquist
former member of the Radiological Assessment Branch

From: "Egidi, Phil" <Phil.Egidi at dphe.state.co.us>
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List 
<radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
Sent: Wed, March 16, 2011 12:58:35 PM
Subject: [ RadSafe ] NRC Press Release and suggested PAGs

It is suggested one look at the most recent NRC press release and
modeling with respect to suggested PAGS for US Citizens in Japan.  The
values postulated are sobering...



Phil Egidi

More information about the RadSafe mailing list