[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Problems with SC-46 Quote



Radsafers,

I was also puzzled by the quotation given by Mr. Shadis  from

this draft document.   I also found it difficult to obtain on the

web, although a partial copy, stopping at page 51 is out there.

It doesn't include appendix A, though.  One reference to it said

it was not to be quoted or referenced, though.  I would very much

like to see the full document.



My problem with the material as quoted is that it does not

provide nough information to determine the risk to any

individual.  It is stated that so much activity dispersed under

thus and such conditions would result in a *dose* of 600 rem.

There was no indication of expected "occupancy."  In other words,

the [effective] dose would presumably be quite different if one

were passing though the area in a fast train as opposed to lying

there unconcious for two days.



So what is this 600 rem?  Is it really 600 rem/hour? 600 rem/24

hours or 600 rem/lifetime?  Could it be 600 man-rem for some

postulated population with a modeled occupancy in an area having

a given dose rate? Without the details of  SC 46-14, which no

longer seem to be publicly available, we cannot judge what this

number means.



I do not want to cast aspersions, but Mr. Shadis' use of these

numbers without sufficient parameters to draw conclusions from

them does not add to the discussion.



Joel Lazewatsky, Ph.D.

Bristol-Myers Squibb Medical Imaging



The opinions expressed herein are mine alone and do not

necessarily represent those of my employer.



  Radsafers:

  I received a reply  [copied below] from a New England area

anti-nuclear activist, Ray Shadis of Maine, who has

  posted at times to Radsafe to the post I made to DOEWatch about

sabotage warnings by the FBI regarding

  natural gas and oil industries.



  Mr. Shadis, as noted below,  makes much of some content he

states was included in NCRP Draft Report SC

  46-14 " Radiation Protection Issues Related to Terrorist

Activities That Result in a Dispersal of Radioactive

  Material, " September 2000. I believe reference was made to

this draft document in earlier discussions on

  Radsafe. However, not having either the draft or final reports

at hand [or a copy of the earlier posts on this

  subject], I am not able to respond specifically to Mr. Shadis'

claims about dispersal of radioactivity from 100 kg

  of 5 year old fuel by 1000 lbs of TNT [equivalent] and what was

assumed in the calculation. I would assume that

  this calculation makes the initial assumption that the fuel was

not in a cask, but I'm not sure.



  Does someone have the details of what was assumed in coming up

with the dose estimate claimed in the post

  by Mr. Shadis as having been in the Draft NCRP Report SC

46-14??



  If this information has been posted earlier to Radsafe, perhaps

someone could email me a copy. It would seem

  informative to critique Mr. Shadis' claims if there are serious

flaws in fact or emphasis both in reply to

  DOEWatch [which I could post until I get thrown off their

"discussion" group.], or to the distribution for his post

  below.



  Thanks for any help in clarifying these rather extreme  claims

of nuclear plant vulnerability



  Stewart Farber, MSPH

  Public Health Sciences

  email: SAFarberMSPH@cs.com



  ----------------

  Forwarded Message:

  Subj: Re: [DOEWatch] Oil and Gas Energy infrastructure a

terrorist target-FBI Warning

  Date: 11/26/01 4:10:08 PM Pacific Standard Time





  From:    shadis@ime.net (Raymond Shadis)

  Reply-to:    shadis@ime.net (Raymond Shadis)

  To:    nrc_concerns@yahoogroups.com (NRC CONCERNS),

doewatch@yahoogroups.com (DOEWATCH),

  radiumproj@cs.com



  Dear Mr. Farber,

      Please reconcile your notion of limited offsite

consequences for

  radiological sabotage with the offsite dose estimates and dose

distributions

  in appendix A of  the NCRP Draft Report SC 46-14 " Radiation

Protection

  Issues Related to Terrorist Activities That Result in a

Dispersal of

  Radioactive Material, " September 2000.



  Graphs in that document show some extraordinary doses ( 600

REM) at about

  110 kilometers 24 hours Post-Blast for 100 kg of 5 year old

fuel distributed

  by 1000 lbs of TNT ( equivalent). As near as I can tell the

estimates were

  modeled by Tom Dahlstrom of Bechtel in Nevada. The graphs and

accompanying

  tables were thrown out in the final report NCRP 138,October 24,

2001,  as

  was the title.



  138 avoids quantification of radioactive material dispersal and

dose and is

  accordingly retitled, "Management of Terrorist Events Involving

Radioactive

  Material."



  Some interesting, though strained, language remains in NCRP 138

on page 16,

  " Spent nuclear fuel elements could also be targeted, but they

contain much

  less radioactive material than an operating reactor plant

because of the

  rapid decay fission products.

  Concerning the affected area, health hazards would be similar

to that which

  occurred at Chernobyl, but on a significantly smaller

scale...Areas at risk

  from high-level radioactive waste dispersed by a large

explosive device can

  be many miles from the source. With a smaller amount of source

material and

  explosive, the area of concern is more in the range of several

city blocks

  or a few miles from the target area."



  Coincidently, I had lunch today with a CNO from a large nuclear

utility who

  stated quite emphatically that he did not disagree with the

consequence

  figures in the SC 46-14 Draft.  Could you please put a rosy hue

on all this

  so that I don't engage in too much hand-wringing?



  Thanks for all your diligent work in protecting the public

health from

  radiation hazards, minimal though they may be.



     Raymond Shadis

     Friends of the Coast

                                               Staff

  Advisor



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

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.