[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Re[2]: Contaminated Residential Waste from I-131 Patients
And what is your opinion of the EPA??
I'm sure there are many very conscientious employees there also.
I don't percieve the issue as the employees, but rather the bureacracy.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: steve.rima@DOEGJPO.COM [SMTP:steve.rima@DOEGJPO.COM]
> Sent: Friday, February 11, 2000 11:59 AM
> To: Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: Re[2]: Contaminated Residential Waste from I-131 Patients
>
>
> Geez Carol,
>
> Lighten up!!! I, for one, am getting a bit tired of your nasty
> diatribes
> against the NRC. By now, we all know how you feel about that
> particular
> agency. (No, I've never worked for them or for any other branch the
> government, except for my Naval service long ago.) Over my 25+ year
> career,
> I've met some very conscientious NRC employees, along with some bad
> ones.
>
> Maybe I'm mistaken, but I don't believe that the NRC can dictate
> landfill
> limits to states. Many states have standards such as Indiana's, where
> there
> are detectors at landfills that try to "filter out" all radioactive
> material. Even if the NRC tried to come up with a scientifically
> acceptable
> method for allowing medical isotopes in, states are still legally
> allowed
> to have more conservative regulations. If this is not the case, could
>
> someone correct me?
>
> I'm definitely NOT defending such practices at landfills, but I don't
>
> believe we can lay blame for that problem on the NRC.
>
> Many RADSAFERS get upset with flames against individuals via RADSAFE.
> Let's
> not have a double standard where it's okay to flame government
> agencies
> repeatedly.
>
> My opinion only,
>
> Please direct any flames to my personal email address below
>
> Steven D. Rima, CHP, CSP
> Manager, Health Physics and Industrial Hygiene
> MACTEC-ERS, LLC
> steve.rima@doegjpo.com
>
> ______________________________ Reply Separator
> _________________________________
> Subject: Re: Contaminated Residential Waste from I-131 Patients
> Author: carol marcus <csmarcus@ucla.edu> at Internet
> Date: 2/11/00 9:50 AM
>
>
> At 08:21 AM 2/11/00 -0600, you wrote:
> Dear Richard and Radsafers:
>
> Hasn't the State of Indiana heard of a really neat invention called a
> portable MCA? You can actually identify radionuclides with it, instead of
>
> trying to do it by halflife.
>
> The real problem, of course, is not the medical people, or the patients
> who
> contaminate everything they touch, but with INSIGNIFICANT LEVELS of
> contamination. NRC took that into consideration when, after 7 years of
> farce, finally passed the "500 mrem rule". The problem is permitting a
> state to make a scientifically dumb standard for trash of "zero
> radioactivity". That's where the problem is, and that's where it should
> be
> fixed. Low levels of radioactive contamination (from patient body fluids)
>
> which are unregulated and not required to be buried in LLRW sites or
> decayed
> out should be allowed in garbage dumps or incinerators, just as it is
> allowed in hospitals and homes. It merely requires the ability to
> identify
> and estimate the activity level of medically relevant radionuclides. This
>
> is not at all difficult.
>
> I really must reject the idea that because some naive and uninformed
> bureaucrats make a scientifically nonsensical standard, that the only
> choice
> is for the health physics, medical physics, and medical community to kill
> themselves complying with it. The answer is to CHANGE THE STANDARD. It
> would be nice if NRC did this for us, informing states of unacceptable and
>
> unreasonable standards for low levels of contaminants unassociated with
> any
> risk. Alas, for years, the NRC has not had the balls or the brains to do
> this. Not after the Commissioners and their staffs screwed up BRC big
> time.
> There are even those at NRC who would use irrational state garbage dump
> standards as an excuse to take away the 500 mrem rule, rather than defend
> good science and cost-effective medicine against irrational hysteria.
> Hopefully, the NRC Commissioners will not be so foolish, but I don't see
> them
> making any effort to inform the nation of the basis for safe levels of
> medical contaminants, either.
>
> The logical end of this hysteria is to keep all radioactive patients in
> isolated hospital rooms with dedicated plumbing until total decay of all
> the
> radionuclides. This is patently impossible, especially when one considers
>
> trace contaminants that are present, such as Tc-99 with a halflife of
> about
> 200,000 years! The cost of even doing this for most of the radioactivity
> is
> enormous. I costed it out once for currently used radionuclides in
> nuclear
> medicine without even considering the contaminants. It went well into the
>
> multibillions of dollars, and would effectively end nuclear medicine.
> Considering that the average American has three nuclear medicine
> procedures
> during his lifetime, this is going to affect a lot of people.
>
> So, if NRC continues to play the coward, get your state rad health group
> to
> work with the garbage folks to fix this. Get your professional
> organizations to help them do so. EDUCATE people on the safety of harmless
>
> levels of generally short or rather short-lived medical radionuclides.
> Explain that with a "no radioactivity" policy, it is illegal to dispose of
> a
> banana or a piece of hamburger because of K-40, for example.
>
> Maybe the National Academy of Sciences could get a contract to make
> standards for garbage dumps and incinerators, as waiting for the NRC
> appears
> to be a lost cause. Maybe there are even better ways. However, keeping
> every atom out of the dump or incinerator isn't one of them.
>
> Ciao, Carol
>
> Carol S. Marcus, Ph.D., M.D.
> <csmarcus@ucla.edu>
>
> ************************************************************************
> The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
> ************************************************************************
> The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html