[Fwd: Re: >> "oops"]

[William V Lipton <liptonw@DTEENERGY.COM>]

This is forwarded to RADSAFE with the author's permission.



Bill Lipton

liptonw@dteenergy.com



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

Subject: Re: >> "oops"

Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2001 08:00:52 -0500

From: Health Physics Liberation Front <hplf@cfu.net>

To: William V Lipton <liptonw@DTEENERGY.COM>

References: <3BBD97A9.8476BFA4@dteenergy.com>



Actually, regulators and most users do take radiography controls

seriously.

However, it is difficult to do much more without eliminating the

industry OR

entirely changing the entire regulatory model whereby you probably

eliminate

all uses of radiation.  (Then again, some of us feel the NRC should have

quit fighting the States and listened more when they created their IR

regs -- I do feel that several of the NRC mandated changes created more

risk

than existed in some of the big IR States).



History also shows it is extremely difficult to get a fatality with a

radiography source -- though not seemingly from lack of trying.  When

you

consider the numbers, the industry and the work conditions, it is rather

amazing how few overexposures and permanent injuries have occurred.  An

honest comparison to similar industries would be very interesting.



Wes



Wesley M. Dunn, CHP

wmd@cfu.net







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

From: "William V Lipton" <liptonw@DTEENERGY.COM>

To: <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 6:21 AM

Subject: >> "oops"





> Here's another radiography event, with nonstochastic damage.  I'm afraid

> that it will take a fatality to get the regulators and users to take

> radiography controls seriously.

>

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

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.