RE: "Watchdog group questions safety of nuclear plant"

[Tom Morgan <tmorgan@ISOTOPEPRODUCTS.COM>]

I am sure that I don't have to remind readers of this list that "safe" is

relative, not absolute.  Objective determination of safety (as requested by

Mr. Cohen) is accomplished by estimated the risk associated with any

activity.  The calculated risk is then compared to some benchmark that

everyone understands and accepts.



For example, imagine that one considering a one time transport of spent fuel

rods on a public highway.  Assume that the risk of shipping cask rupture in

an accident during this transport is 1:10,000 and that the risk of serious

bodily injury or death from such a rupture is 1:100/person exposed from such

a rupture.  Also assume that in the event of such a rupture 20 people would

be exposed.  The risk therefore is defined as

	0.0001x0.01x20 = 0.00002 deaths or serious injuries



NUREG 1496, Volume 2, Appendix B, Table A.1 lists the fatal accident rate

for trucks at 3.8E-8/km.  If a trucker drives 50,000 miles (80,470 km) in

one year, his/her risk of a fatal accident is 

	0.000000038x80470 = 0.0031



If one defines safe as less risk than that associated with a known

benchmark, it is far riskier, for the trucker, to drive 50,000 miles than it

is to make this one time shipment.



In short, there is a formalism that has been developed for risk analysis.

"Safe" cannot be quantified unless or until one can calculate and compare

risks.



Thomas L. Morgan, Ph.D.

Director, Health Physics

Radiation Safety Officer

Isotope Products Laboratories

24937 Avenue Tibbitts

Santa Clarita, CA 91355

661-309-1033 (voice)

818-558-4087 (fax)









-----Original Message-----

From: Jerry Cohen [mailto:jjcohen@PRODIGY.NET]

Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 11:31 AM

To: Jacobus, John (OD/ORS); Norman Cohen; radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

Subject: Re: "Watchdog group questions safety of nuclear plant"





> One of the failures of the nuclear power industry and regulators is their

> inability to say "It is safe.  And we will continue to ensure that it

> remains safe."



John, Norman, et al,



    How can it be scientifically determined that anything is "safe"?



    How can one prove the absence of risk?



    In other words, is safety just a warm fuzzy feeling, or can it be

objectively

determined? WASH 1400 (The Rasmussen study) in 1974 showed that

nuclear power was relatively safer than than most things we accept without

concern. Nevertheless accidents are possible so it is not absolutely safe.

So----- What do you mean by SAFE, and what could the nuclear power

industry  and regulators do to "ensure that it remains safe"?????





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

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.

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

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.