Cost-benefit based justification of radiation regulation

[Sonter Mark <sonterm@EPA.NSW.GOV.AU>]

Maybe somebody in radsafe-land can help me with this......



I have been trying to find papers giving case studies describing the use of

cost-benefit analysis to support, in detail, the introduction of specific

radiation control regulations.



There doesn't appear to be all that much in the literature, despite lots of

'hand-waving' text from ICRP.



And that little amount which I have been able to find seems to concentrate

on small decrements in dose achieved in normal operations, as a result of

mandating some incremental technology improvement.  And then assigning a

benefit value to the averted dose using an alpha figure of (say) US$100,000

per person-Sievert, and (finally) comparing that value with the cost of

implementation of the regulation including the cost of new equipment etc.. 



Now, this (it seems to me) has 2 shortcomings:

1.	It places reliance on 'really' believing in the LNT at small averted

dose decrements, and the notional $ value of the doses averted;

2.	It overlooks what I think is the more important, more 'real', and

probably quantifiable, value of radiation control regulations, which is in

requiring the set-up of systems which act to prevent MAJOR MISHAPS, which

would have major dose consequences.



So, my query is, where do I go to find probability of major mishap radiation

incidents, in regulated and in unregulated regimes; and where do I go to

find expectation doses from such major radiation mishaps??? 



Mark Sonter 

************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.