Re: Scientific responsibility

[Dimiter Popoff <tgi@cit.bg>]

I believe this is two-fold. Spending more than necessary because of

LNT or whatever tradition may result in technical progress which most if not

all people want. All this would be OK within certain limits which I am

not sure are OK as they are now - I just don't know enough about that.



 On the other hand I have seen more than once what I would just call 'criminal

activity' when it comes to how the right company will get the money (e.g.

years of delay until the right company has something which may pass as being

good enough compared to what the wrong company has etc.).

 This is a major issue in industries where no private (I mean small

enough, truly private) sector exists, I know it from painful experience

(having the perhaps smallest company in the branche with the most

advanced technology of its kind to date for quite some time now...).



Dimiter



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

Dimiter Popoff

Transgalactic Instruments

http://transgalactic.freeyellow.com





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

> From: William V Lipton <liptonw@DTEENERGY.COM>

> Subject: Re: Scientific responsibility

> To: Les Aldrich <laldrich@gte.net>

> Cc: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

> Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 07:41:13 -0400

>

> "Criminal waste of financial resources..."  Wow!  I didn't know about that.

> Have you called the Attorney General?  I'd at least call the NRC Chair and tell

> him that he has the right to remain silent!

> 

> While I can't defend every "ALARA" decision, I suggest that you read the

> definition of ALARA  in 10 CFR 20.1003:  "ALARA ... means making every

> reasonable effort to maintain exposures to radiation as far below the dose

> limits in this part as is practical consistent with the purpose for which the

> licensed activity is undertaken, taking into account the state of technology,

> the economics of improvements in relation to the state of technology, the

> economics of improvements in relation to benefits to the public health and

> safety, and other societal and socioeconomic considerations..."  [emphasis mine]

> 

> Exactly what part of this do you find "criminal"?  If you have problems with an

> inspector's  interpretation of this concept, then that's what you should be

> disputing.

> 

> You mention the case of radwaste in a landfill.  To me, the reason for making

> the licensee recover the waste is as much to deter future mishaps and promote

> good practices as to minimize the risk from that incident.  Your argument is

> equivalent to saying that you shouldn't get a citation for running a red light,

> since there was no accident.

> 

> The opinions expressed are strictly mine.

> It's not about dose, it's about trust.

> Curies forever.

> 

> Bill Lipton

> liptonw@dteenergy.com

> 

> 

> 

> 

> Les Aldrich wrote:

> 

> > Bill,

> >

> > ... When the average site dose is 17 millirem and we're told by the oversight

> > government agency that we have to reduce the dose further because "ALARA says

> > so" (a direct result of worshiping the idol of LNT), that is a criminal waste

> > of financial resources that could be better used elsewhere.

> > ...

> >

> >

> > If you don't believe we're wasting money, watch how much is spend when a

> > government facility inadvertently transfers low-level waste to the local

> > public land-fill.  The cost of searching for and retrieving the offending

> > radioactive material is easily in 5 significant figures, if not six.  The

> > maximum dose rate that would exist at the land-fill surface if the

> > radioactive material was left there is usually somewhere in the microrem/y

> > range.

> >

> > I prefer my tax dollars to go toward using ALARA principles to protect

> > workers who are engaged in high-dose rate work and/or site cleanup

> > activities....

> 



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

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/