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

Re: Incident/Accident



The fact is  almost all interpretation use incident to describe events

that are, in effect, minor accidents.

This is clearly in INES:



incident: An event classified as Level 1, 2 or 3, i.e. beyond the authorized

operating regime, but not as serious as an accident.



 accident: An event classified as Level 4, 5, 6 or 7, i.e. that involves a

release of radioactive material off-site likely to cause public exposure at

least of the order of authorized limits or requiring countermeasures to be

taken, or causes significant damage to the installation, or results in

exposure of workers on-site to such a degree that there is a high

probability of early death.



Level 1 (anomaly): An event beyond the authorized operating regime, but not

involving significant failures in safety provisions, significant spread of

contamination or overexposure of workers.

Level 2 (incident): An event involving significant failure in safety

provisions, but with sufficient defence in depth remaining to cope with

additional failures, and/or resulting in a dose to a worker exceeding a

statutory dose limit and/or leading to the presence of activity in on-site

areas not expected by design and which require corrective action.

 Level 3 (serious incident): A near accident, where only the last layer of

defence in depth remained operational, and/or involving severe spread of

contamination on-site or deterministic effects to a worker, and/or a very

small release of radioactive material off-site (i.e. critical group dose of

the order of tenths of a mSv).



Clearly INES is applied only to Nuclear Installation



I am not go to comment the accident with fatalities, like Morocco, Zaragoza

(Spain),  Egypt, Xinzhou (China), Georgia, Costa Rica, Panama, etc. I'll

consider only two accidents, because the situation of contamination:  the

radiological  Accident in Juarez (Mexico) and the Radiological Accident in

Goiania (Brazil)



                 JUAREZ, MEXICO

GOIANIA, BRAZIL

                        0         Deaths

4         deaths

                        5         300 - 700 rem

14     100 - 700 rem

                       80             > 25 rem

54    > 25 rem

                     720            0.5 - 25 rem

244         0.5 - 25 rem

                   3200 (?)         < 500 mrem

2500 (?)     <500 mrem





JUAREZ 418 buildings demolished

GOIANIA 3,500 cubic meter of Waste contaminated with Cs-137 generated



Taking into account the general description of the INES, "The International

Nuclear Event Scale (INES) is a tool to promptly and consistently

communicate to the public the safety significance of reported events at

nuclear installations. By putting events into proper perspective, the Scale

can ease common understanding among the nuclear community, the media, and

the public."

It is necessary to clarify, well understand to communicate correctly to

media and public such radiological events (accident ? - incident?)



Jose Julio Rozental

joseroze@netvision.net.il

Israel









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

From: Dave Derenzo <dave@UIC.EDU>

To: <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 4:12 PM

Subject: Re: Incident/Accident





>From what I understand, folks in the safety field (i.e., industrial

hygiene, fire safety, etc.) are moving away from the word "accident"

because it implies nothing could have been done to prevent it.  They feel

that most events that were once called "accidents" were definitely

preventable.



At 03:11 AM 1/25/02, you wrote:

>Respect definitions the yet valid IAEA glossary:

>

>accident

>

>Any unintended event, including operating errors, equipment failures or

>other mishaps, the consequences or potential consequences of which are not

>negligible from the point of view of protection or safety.

>

>event

>

>In the context of the reporting and analysis of events, an event is any

>unintended occurrence, including operating error, equipment failure or

other

>mishap, the consequences or potential consequences of which are not

>negligible from the point of view of protection or safety.

>

>incident See INES.

>

>The word incident is often used, in INES and elsewhere, to describe events

>that are, in effect, minor accidents, i.e. that are distinguished from

>accidents only in terms of being less severe. This is an arbitrary

>distinction with little basis in normal usage. An incident can be minor or

>major, just as an accident can, but unlike an accident, an incident can be

>caused intentionally. The existing misuses of incident, such as INES,

cannot

>be eliminated, but new examples should not be created.

>  nuclear incident: [Any occurrence or series of occurrences having the

same

>origin which causes nuclear damage or, but only with respect to preventive

>measures, creates a grave and imminent threat of causing such damage.]

>

>conclusions:

>

>a) accident "Any unintended event..........

>b) event "Any unintended occurrence.......

>c) incident ;

>(i)) " Often used to describe events that are, in effect, minor

accidents" -

>"distinguished from accidents only in terms of being less severe"

>(ii) "This is an arbitrary distinction with little basis in normal usage" -

>"An incident can be minor or major, just as an accident can"

>(iii) "but unlike an accident, an incident can be caused intentionally "

>

>More conclusion: -

>

>a) If event "Any unintended occurrence.......

>b) If " an incident can be caused intentionally " - In this case incident

is

>not an event - Sense or not sense?

>c) "The existing misuses of incident, such as INES, cannot be eliminated,

>but new examples should not be created."...

>

>When I asked why many colleagues from England and USa use incident instead

>accident, is really why I wish to understand better this reason.

>Many express Goiania Incident. There was not incident however rather an

>acident.

>England has a very important document: NAIR - National Arrangements for

>Incidents involving Radioactivity - Why they do not change Incidents by

>Events, like -IAEA INES?  - By the way if radsafers are interested can

>download NAIR 2000, as a leaflet pdf format,  using

>http://www.nrpb.org/radiation_incidents/nair.htm

>

>Now with respect  the first Jack's point, I would like to make some

>comments:

>

> >My early experience and training as a rad con supervisor included

specific

> >public relations, now called "politically correct," responses to

> >radiological events or "issues," another one of those words.

>

>Comment:

>

>We can't to avoid the use of the words accident or incident, we have to

>understand the correct nuclear/radiological meaning to use one or the

other.

>Event as you refer is exactly this:  accident or incident

>

> >Accident" wasn't used because it conveyed a meaning, especially to the

> >public, of a catastrophic event--we don't want to create undue panic or

>concern.

>

>Comment:

>

>Again, we can't avoid explaining to the public the Nuclear/Radiological

>Event Scale. There are several reasons why public has not confidence, I'll

>write two concerning this subject:

>a) Regulatory Authority in many situations tries to minimize the situation;

>b) Spokesperson also in many situations explains by means of abstract

words.

>

>Lamentable that there is not an International Radiological

>Event Scale. Last year I did such proposal to IAEA. This takes time and

>IAEA's priority.

>

>Jose Julio Rozental

>joseroze@netvision.net.il

>Israel

>

>

>----- Original Message -----

>From: Cristian S. Nicolau <cnicolau@NBNET.NB.CA>

>To: <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

>Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:38 PM

>Subject: Incident/Accident

>

>

>Some years ago, in Romania we had those two terms very well defined:

>Accident=event which affects the persons of the public

>Incident=event which does not affect the public

>I do not know if the new law is using the same terminology but this is a

>good way of using the two words, when describing radiological events. I

>always assumed this was coming from the IAEA recommendations.

>

>Regards,

>Cristian S. Nicolau

>************************************************************************

>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/

>

>----- Original Message -----

>From: Cristian S. Nicolau <cnicolau@NBNET.NB.CA>

>To: <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

>Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:38 PM

>Subject: Incident/Accident

>

>

>Some years ago, in Romania we had those two terms very well defined:

>Accident=event which affects the persons of the public

>Incident=event which does not affect the public

>I do not know if the new law is using the same terminology but this is a

>good way of using the two words, when describing radiological events. I

>always assumed this was coming from the IAEA recommendations.

>

>Regards,

>Cristian S. Nicolau

>************************************************************************

>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/

>

>

>

>

>

>

>************************************************************************

>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/



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

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/







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

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/