Re: US radiation safety limits not based on science-GAO

["J. J. Rozental" <joseroze@netvision.net.il>]

a) The following NRC site has a very interesting information on this issue:

Radiological Criteria for License Termination
http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/CFR/FR/19970721/072197.html

GO TO:  "Specifically with regard to the risk level, some of the commenters
stated
that the risk of fatal cancers from 0.15 mSv/y (15 mrem/y) is too high in
comparison with risk goals in the range 1 x 10-4 to 1 x 10-6 used by EPA
in.............."

I could add the following, taking into account ICRP recommendation:

Dose constraints apply to doses expected to be deliverd by a specific source
within a practice; the dose limits apply to doses which are predicted to be
aggregated by all relevant practices.
Dose constraints are specific to the practice involved and to sources within
the practice. In principle, they should be established on a case-by-case
basis, with due consideration of the maximum annual dose that would be
acceptable from a new source at a single location, taking into account
exposures from other sources subject to control and equity considerations.
Sometimes, however, they can be set on the basis of simple generic
optimization.
In its main recommendations, the ICRP did not suggest any numerical values
for dose constraints. Recently, however, it was provided some quantitative
recommendations within the context of radioactive waste disposal. The ICRP
recommended that the dose constraint should be less than 1 mSv and that a
value of no more than about 0.3 mSv would be appropriate. These
recommendations are in principle appliable to prolonged exposure.


b) About 1 mSv and 5 mSv  the ICRP and IAEA recommend an annual limit on
effective dose
of 1 mSv in a year. However, in special circumstances, a higher value of
effective dose
could be allowed in a single year, provided that the average over 5 years
does not exceed 1 mSv per year.

Jose Julio Rozental
joseroze@netvision.net.il
Israel





----- Original Message -----
From: Dave Derenzo <dave@uic.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 4:40 PM
Subject: Re: US radiation safety limits not based on science-GAO


> Aren't the NRC limits for the public 100 mrem per for most of the
> population and 500 mrem per year to a small fraction of the
> population?  Where did the 25 mrem limit come from?  Where in the regs is
> the EPA limit of 15 mrem found?
>
> Dave Derenzo
>
> At 09:43 PM 07/14/2000 -0500, you wrote:
> >US radiation safety limits not based on science-GAO
> >
> >WASHINGTON, July 14 (Reuters) - A disagreement between
> >federal agencies over what level of radiation exposure is safe for
> >
> >The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), which oversees the
> >nation's nuclear power plants, says exposure should not exceed 25
> >millirem per year, while the Environmental Protection Agency
> >(EPA) has set a standard of 15 millirem, with ground water levels
> >not to exceed 4 millirem.
>
>
> Dave Derenzo, RSO (dave@uic.edu)
> UIC Radiation Safety Section, M/C 932
> Phones: Voice (312) 996-1177  Fax: (312) 996-8776
>
> ************************************************************************
> 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