Senate Bill 1043

[Carol, Marcus]

world.At 01:36 PM 7/10/03 -0700, you wrote:

no, please!  They just do not understand radiation machines!



EMCTGA@AOL.COM wrote:

 >

 > Everything radioactive should be under the NRC and only the NRC!

 >

 > Jim Harvey

 > Environmental Management and Controls

 > Turlock, CA

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

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/



Dear Radsafers:



NRC does not understand medicine and pharmacy, either.  See the national 

Academy of Sciences-Institute of Medicine Report entitled "Radiation in 

Medicine:  A Need for Regulatory Reform", published in 1996.  The NAS-IOM 

recommended that the Atomic Energy Act be amended to remove NRC from 

medical and medical research activities, leaving them with Part 

20.  Chairman Ivan Selin and Commissioner E. Gail de Planque encouraged the 

NAS-IOM in this direction.



  While conceptually I agree that it makes little sense to separate source, 

byproduct, and special nuclear material from NARM, I think we have to 

remove NRC from byproduct material and university research 

reactors.  Basically, I would get rid of NMSS and give the whole program to 

the states, all of which would automatically become Agreement States, and 

would either put together their own programs or contract with another 

Agreement State for services.  It was Dixie Lee Ray who suggested that NRC 

be removed from university reactors before they are destroyed by 

overregulation.  I would crush the National Materials Program to oblivion, 

because it is only a ruse whereby NRC demands that its own, (inferior) 

program be adopted instead of that of the states, and gives the illusion 

that NRC has some function in the materials area.  Uniformity is not an 

advantage if it is uniformly bad.  The National Materials Program also 

thwarts the ability of states to hire good people for their programs---who 

wants to be an NRC "licensee"?  NRC has turned this into an ugly job.



In a near-perfect world, NRC would have the intelligence, competence, 

rationality, integrity, and honesty of the old AEC (not perfect, but darned 

good).  But, this is not a near-perfect world.



The other problem with this bill is that no one can comply with it.  The 

requirements are hysterical, bizarre, and amazing.  How many of you could 

comply?  Inhofe ought to call it the "Nuclear Extinction Act of 2003".  At 

least it would be honest.



By the way, I still do not understand what security hazards are present 

with accelerator-produced radionuclides (ARM).  I am involved with RDD 

planning for Los Angeles County and for two federal medical emergency 

response teams, and while I can imagine numerous dangerous scenarios, none 

are related to ARM.  F-18? O-15? C-11? N-13? In-111? I-123? Ga-67? Anyone 

who wants to make an RDD out of these---fine!  It will merely be a dress 

rehearsal for a significant RDD!



Methinks that NRC's megalomania has been sneaked into this bill under the 

illusion of national security...............



Ciao, Carol



Carol S. Marcus, Ph.D., M.D.

<csmarcus@ucla.edu>