Fwd: Re: ICRP 2 standard

[Brian Rees <brees@LANL.GOV>]

While defending a decision to not exceed DOE's maximum of

$10,000/person-rem for an evolution (please, don't start), I got a copy

of NUREG 1530, "Reassessment of NRC's Dollar Per Person-Rem

Conversion Factor Policy".  It makes for fairly intersting

reading in this area.  


Brian Rees 




> I think
>
> it was Bismarck who said, "It is a good thing that people do not
>
> know how either laws or sausages are made." 
>
> As regards the derivation $1000/man-rem guide,
>
> I may be able to shed some light on its origin since I was peripherally
>
> involved. In 1970, in the HPJ (19:633) I authored a paper that suggested
>
> a value of $250/man-rem. That paper generated much criticism to the
>
> effect that I was implicitly placing a value on human life. However, in
>
> the following year, several others publications (including those by
>
> Dunster, Lindell, & Lederberg) also gave estimated values ranging
>
> from $10 to $960 per man-rem. So in response to the criticism I received,
>
> I submitted a rebuttal letter to the HPJ editor summarizing these other
>
> estimates which had a median value of ~$200/man-rem to argue that my
>
> original estimate was not unreasonable. This letter was published (HPJ
>
> 21:567) in 1972, and was cited by Walt Rogers in his testimony before the
>
> NRC hearings to develop Appendix I on controlling liquid effluents from
>
> nuclear power plants. To be "conservative" the commission chose
>
> the highest estimate ($960) and rounded it off to an even $1000/man-rem.
>
> Out of curiosity, I contacted the author of the $960/man-rem value to see
>
> how this estimate was made. I learned that it derived from the estimated
>
> cost-effectiveness for ejector seats for Air Force fighter planes.
>
> Bismarck was right!
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> >From Bill Lipton
>
> :          I'm not
>
> questioning the
>
> > integrity of these people, but those decisions were wrong.  If
>
> benzene, a
>
> > radiomimetic, can have a PEL, why can't radiation?   How
>
> did we decide that we
>
> > should spend $1000 to avoid a man-rem (10 CFR 50, Appendix I; I've
>
> heard of
>
> > figures as high as $10000/man-rem.) when a significant fraction of
>
> our
>
> > population is denied access to basic health care?
>
> > 
>
> > I have probably benefited personally from these decisions.  As
>
> a colleague once
>
> > stated:  "Radiations's been very very good to
>
> me!"  Yet I am not happy about
>
> > it.  It is ultimately demoralizing to devote your life to
>
> protecting people from
>
> > imaginary hazards.  This, not academic funding is the reason
>
> for the "Human
>
> > Capital Crisis in Radiation Safety" (HPS Position Statement,
>
> August, 2001.)
>
> >look at the real problem, for a change.
>
>  
>
> > Bill Lipton
>
> >
>
> liptonw@dteenergy.com
>
>  
>
> The late Leonard Sagan commented, "A
>
> lot more have lived off of radiation than have died from it"



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

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 can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/