Fw: more on St. Lucie

["Michael G. Stabin" <michael.g.stabin@vanderbilt.edu>]

Further comments from Pete Bailey at St. Lucie:



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

> Part of the concern, actually most of the concern

> from the regulatory arena, is not the dose, but the 'expectation of it'.

> 

> If a plan says  x  should happen, and 32 x happens,

> even though the 'happen' had little circumstance (dose)

> the attention is   'why was it 32 x instead of the expected x '.

> 

> The 'free release' of items and people suffers the same enigma,

> little itty-bitty quantities draw lots of attention..

> 

> The 'over controls' are not there to protect any one from a meaningful

> dose,

> regular controls are more than adequate from a 'dose' view point.

> 

> It's an issue of regulatory compliance.

> Regulations basically state that RAM can not leave the licensee's control

> unless you know it.

> 

> A person declared clean leaves a site, a trace of RAM is found somewhere,

> somehow ;

> for example, the next site has a new, better ( more sensitive ) detection

> system . . .

> 

> Bingo - the issue is not the rad-hazard, the issue is you released it and

> didn't know.

> 

> The PROBLEM :  a lack of  'de minimus' ,

>       If it's below de minimus, who cares . . .

>      You only have to look as hard as  de minimus

> 

>       We'll stop the spiral of "I'll look harder than you",

>       and we all know too well : If ya look hard enough, you'll find 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/