Re: we're still our own worse enemy

["Sandy Perle" <sandyfl@earthlink.net>]

>  If the uppermost supervisor (the public) wants to be
> assured that there is no risk around even for the 100th time and months
> after an accident, which would not have emitted any radionuclides - then it
> will be done. 

And at the same time the pro-nuclear option is questioned due to cost 
over-runs, continued high operating and maintenance costs, etc.

Don't you think that performing these unnecessary surveys, system 
modifications and any other unnecessary purchase adds to this extra 
cost, that is ultimately paid for by the public? Do we really need to 
continue to expend billions of $$ a year on what can only be 
identified as completely wasteful?


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy Perle					Tel:(714) 545-0100 / (800) 548-5100   				    	
Director, Technical				Extension 2306 				     	
ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Division		Fax:(714) 668-3149 	                   		    
ICN Biomedicals, Inc.				E-Mail: sandyfl@earthlink.net 				                           
ICN Plaza, 3300 Hyland Avenue  		E-Mail: sperle@icnpharm.com          	          
Costa Mesa, CA 92626                                      

Personal Website:  http://www.geocities.com/scperle
ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Website: http://www.dosimetry.com

************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html