RE: Truck carrying 'low-level' radioactive tools crashes

[Jack_Earley@RL.GOV]

Maybe a little amendment to any of these laws is in order--like requiring a

cost-benefit analysis before any of them are passed. In CO, legislators are

required to calculate prison bed occupancy for any new law they propose.



Jack Earley

Radiological Engineer





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

From: Muckerheide [mailto:muckerheide@attbi.com]

Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2002 11:24 AM

To: Barbara Hamrick; info@eic.nu; jack_earley@rl.gov

Cc: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

Subject: Re: Truck carrying 'low-level' radioactive tools crashes





Hi Barbara,



I appreciate what you say in the specifics below. But consider that Boxer et

al. are a product of being driven by NCRP "officials" and other

Congress-crawlers to reinforce "concerns" about radiation down to 1 mr/yr!



Just because these denizens supported a limit of 100 mr/yr, doesn't mean

that they don't go around Congress and other gullible officialdom strongly

selling the LNT (way beyond what they got out of some more balanced NCRP

report committee) saying that "we don't know" and "100 is a balance" that is

struck for "political" (not scientific) reasons, meaning that they imply

that the "industry" just drags its feet and influences the limits and

regulations until it can be pushed to meet ever new standards (and that "we

can push new standards without having to change the 100 limit" by the rubric

that the 100 must be "shared by all potential exposure sources" (while

ignoring variations in background or medical uses, with limited nodding

acknowledgement at unnecessary medical exposures.



This then justifies, e.g., a 4 mr/yr in water limit at Yucca Mt. To be met

through costly calculations for releases 10s or 100s of thousands of years

in the future!? :-(   But also in immediate terms, a 4 mr/yr limit on radium

and uranium, etc., in drinking water!? :-(  And NCRP et al. (including even

HPS "Washington reps") are there giving Congress-persons the cover that what

they are doing is just a "reasonable conservatism" over the limit

recommendations that these organizations produce formally.



This is compounded by the rad protection industry pushing for the costs of

ever more advanced instruments and capabilities, and claimed to be

"manageable costs," always improving the measurement and compliance

technologies. Of course, the primary way that the costs are made

"manageable" is to be sure they are being paid by the uniformed and gullible

public, reinforced by official fear-mongering to get them to think they are

being "protected."  (That's why it's a "protection racket," which is a

slander to a mafia "protection racket" since if you didn't pay you really

would get your legs broken! They don't just run a con on the gullible! :-)



Bottom line: "Boxer is gullible." She is a victim of the officials that know

better, but do not tell the truth. We need to focus on the real problem, or

we can't make any progress. Even if you get to Boxer, that wouldn't stop

NCRP from conning someone else. The truth needs to be articulated by the

people that know better; and the light must be shined on the source of the

infection. 



And it ain't the media or the politicians!



Regards, Jim

 



on 8/14/02 11:08 PM, BLHamrick@AOL.COM at BLHamrick@AOL.COM wrote:



> In a message dated 08/14/2002 7:45:06 PM Pacific Daylight Time,

> muckerheide@attbi.com writes:

> 

> 

>> The killers are those that lie to them! The NCRP/ICRP/IAEA/BRER. Even the

>> reg agencies are not "the experts." They (the leaders) ignore their own

>> 

> 

> It is much worse than that here in California.  The NCRP still recommends

100

> millirem per year for public dose, but even that is not adequate for our

> honorable <cough, hack, ahem> representatives.  They are still seeking

"zero"

> radiation above background for release of decommissioned sites, and wastes

> that are released from those sites (e.g., soil that has been deemed to be

> releasable for unrestricted use from a radiological standpoint, but which

may

> contain hazardous elements).

> 

> The politicians are as much or more to blame than the NCRP, et al, because

> they are the ones with the power to seduce the monied class, and prevent

any

> science from entering the debate whatsoever.  Want proof?  Go to

> www.senate.ca.gov, click on "Legislation," and search for SB 1444, SB

1970,

> SB 1623, SB 2065 or AB 2214, and read some of the committee analyses.  I

> haven't read those just out yesterday, so don't know where they've come to

> yet, but the early analyses are straight out of

> Comedy Central for physics nerds.

> 

> A little knowledge is dangerous, but virtually no knowledge is terrifying.

> 

> Barbara  <---speaking solely on her own, little, unadulterated behalf

> 

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

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/