[ 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
information.
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
accompanying
modeling with respect to suggested PAGS for US Citizens in Japan. The
numerical
values postulated are sobering...
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/news/2011/11-050_Attchmt.pdf
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/news/2011/11-050.pdf
Phil Egidi
CDPHE
More information about the RadSafe
mailing list